Who is the most hated President?

[Norman Bernstein]

Sorry, I simply couldn't resist posting these graphs... they're either worth a laugh, or deeply thought-provoking, take your pick:


Note that while Bush's approval rating is still a bit higher than Nixon's at a comparable point in his presidency, Bush's disapproval rating is almost exactly the same as Nixon's just before he resigned. In fact, at 63%, Bush's current disapproval rating was only exceeded by Nixon's in two Gallup polls—March, 1974 (65%) and the final poll in July, 1974 just before Nixon left office (66%). For instance, in June, 1974 Nixon's disapproval rating was only 58%, noticeably lower than Bush's is today.

http://tinyrevolution.com/mt-static/images/Bush-Nixon1.jpg

http://tinyrevolution.com/mt-static/images/Bush-Nixon2.jpg

[ishmael]

So glad you can engage this idiocy in a time of war, Norman.

[Norman Bernstein]

So glad you can engage this idiocy in a time of war, Norman.

Well, we're presently in permanent war, but unless someone altered the Constitution and decided to throw out the First Ammendment, I kinda figured that some people might find these graphs pretty spooky.

Or were you a Nixon supporter to the very end? :)

[huisjen]

Bush is showing a much steadier trend.

You don't have a graph for Lincoln, do you? ;)

Dan

[Norman Bernstein]

Is a steadier trend a good thing? :)

[Paul Pless]

You don't have a graph for Lincoln, do you? ;)


How 'bout one for Hoover?

[huisjen]

A trend toward acceptance of reality is an excelent thing. Then we can impeach him (and his boss too) as soon as the new Democratic congress is seated, and get on we dealing with the mess he's made.

Dan

[Norman Bernstein]

How 'bout one for Hoover?

Hoover was a very smart and capable guy who failed to understand that there are times when a President can achieve things through inspiration that couldn't be achieved through cautious conservatism. Roosevelt was a flawed man who understood the power of inspiration.

[Memphis Mike]

Although I'm amoung the ones that disapprove of Bush, I do not 'hate' him.

Hate is a very strong word but I would expect nothing different from you.

[Norman Bernstein]

Although I'm amoung the ones that disapprove of Bush, I do not 'hate' him.

Hate is a very strong word but I would expect nothing different from you.

I don't 'hate' Bush either. I was merely quoting the title of the graphs. And your expectations of me are, frankly, not on my radar screen :D

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Is there a graph for Jackson?

[Phillip Allen]

Although I'm amoung the ones that disapprove of Bush, I do not 'hate' him.

Hate is a very strong word but I would expect nothing different from you.

Alright Mike! I was going to post something like that but you beat me to it. I think the "Hate" here is a nurtured hate and as such is political partisanship only. I reserve hate for something more meaningful…someday I'll figure out what to hate.

[Norman Bernstein]

Alright Mike! I was going to post something like that but you beat me to it. I think the "Hate" here is a nurtured hate and as such is political partisanship only. I reserve hate for something more meaningful…someday I figure out what to hate.

It goes both ways, I suppose. I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of conservatives I personally know who think that Hillary Clinton is someone who deserves a great degree of hate. I once teasingly suggested to one of these folks that he obviously thought that Hillary was the 'devils' spawn'... and he responded, 'no, she's the devil herself!'.

As I said, I don't 'hate' Bush, myself. I do think he's the worst President in the history of the country, I do think he's utterly incompetent, and I do think that history will bear this out, in the future. But personally, he seems like a decent fella. :D

[RichKrough]

Hate is a strong word, Nixon and Bush have certainly make some poor decisions that adversally affected us as a nation but they each have also done some positive things that have benefited us. I don't see anything they have done rise to the level of "hate"

Only person(s) I ever came close to hating was Team Cinzano in "Breaking Away" for sticking a tire pump in Dave's front wheel, 30 years later I am still pissed at the Italians

[uncas]

Is there a graph for Jackson?

I think the Cherokees might have one.
No, they probably can't figure out any other president that they hate more. No contest hence no poll, hence, no graph.
I bet they don't use $20.00 bills on the reservations.

[Ross M]

Is there a graph for Jackson?

Of course not. These graphs, despite their title and introduction, are not a serious examination of the question.

Rather, they are simply fantasy points for partisan circle jerks. Very much like the Ken Starr investigation was for the Republicans.

Ross

[huisjen]

...An investigation that ended with...

[uncas]

I read the question?
" Who is the most hated President?" Jackson was president. He has to be considered as a contender.
I seriously wonder why people hate Nixon. Yes, he was a crook. A lot of our presidents had shady backgrounds. He got caught. Did he kill anyone? He got us outta Vietnam. ( perhaps not under the best of terms ). He signed the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act.
Other than being a crook and getting caught, why is he hated?
For opening the door to China?
I'm just curious. When comparing to other presidents on my list , he is not at the top.
Or, why the comparison to Bush. Two completely different kettle of fish.

[Phillip Allen]

uncas, the answer is obvious...

[Norman Bernstein]

Of course not. These graphs, despite their title and introduction, are not a serious examination of the question.
Ross

Unless the graphs are somehow false, then they are what they are... namely, an interesting comparison of Nixon's presidential approval numbers to George Bush's numbers. I thought that the correspondance of the general trend lines was interesting, which is why I posted it.

Even if you're a rabid Bush supporter, the poll numbers are undeniable: Bush's popularity has been on a steady decline for a very long time now.... at roughly the same rate as Nixons' numbers, up to the point where he narrowly escaped impeachment by resigning. Presidents don't preside on the basis of poll numbers... but those numbers are an accurate assessment of what the country thinks of the President... whether you agree or not... and whether you like it or not.

[Phillip Allen]

"Who is the most hated poster...Norman or Dutch?"

Anyone see any consistency? The question suggests that both are hated and that to the extent that all others pale in comparison...

[Ross M]

Unless the graphs are somehow false, then they are what they are... namely, an interesting comparison of Nixon's presidential approval numbers to George Bush's numbers...

You are right about the graph titles - and I am wrong. They are at least honest enough to express the limitations.

The thread title is an altogether different issue.

Ross

[uncas]

What were Carter's polls in 1979?
The may no tbe as low as Bush's at the moment but they were not very high either. Is he hated?
I think hate is the problem with this question.
Polls should be based on preformance. Bush is not preforming very well. Nixon got caught, hence his poll ratings were low. Carter was not preforming well in 79. Low polls.
Lincoln's military was not preforming well until after Gettysburg overall. A few exceptions. Vicksburg fell on the same day and somehow Antietam in 62 was considered a northern win. His ratings were not good until much later than 63. Heck, he thought he was gonna lose in 64 to the Little Nappy ( Napoleon. ) from NJ.

[Phillip Allen]

Oh yes, I was thinking of the thread title and had to go back to look at the graph title...verbal slight of hand

[LeeG]

Obviously the nattering nabobs of negativism don't support the troops

[High C]

It's hard to believe that the Gallup people would've equated "hate" with "disaproval" in the titling of these graphs. Looks like someone has been monkeying around with them.

[pcford]

"A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday found Bush's approval rating at 34%, two points under his previous low. He also received the lowest ratings of his presidency on his handling of the economy, energy and foreign affairs. He tied his previous low on Iraq: 32%. The poll showed Democrats leading 54%-39% among registered voters who were asked which party they would prefer in a congressional race."

Say g'night Georgie.

[uncas]

So you are saying that if DeLay came back as a democrat and ran against say, for argument's sake, Eisenhower, you would vote for DeLay because he was a democrat?
Strange way to pick your representatives.

[Phillip Allen]

yepper...

[uncas]

Well, Phillip. You can have him... :)

[Rick Clark]

I don't hate anyone, but I do have a great dislike for the Bush's father and son!!!!!
It's all about them and they really have no concern for their fellow men. A rose is a rose and they are just the thorns!!!!

Edit: I don't like the smirk on GWB face every time he speaks. Someone should tell him about it!!

[Phillip Allen]

"Strange way to pick your representatives."

It is that sentence to which I was referring...

[Phillip Allen]

I don't hate anyone, but I do have a great dislike for the Bush's father and son!!!!!
It's all about them and they really have no concern for their fellow men. A rose is a rose and they are just the thorns!!!!

so...are you saying that they're pricks... :)

[Ross M]

In my opinion, Partisanship is a disgusting evil.

Politics is a blood sport, no doubt. The players - and some of the spectators - enjoy it that way. But We The People pay for it every day in the currency of retarded progress.

I detest the bitter Republicans that, rather than build their candidacies on progress, built their candicacies on the destruction of the Clinton administration.

I detest the bitter Democrats that, rather than build their candidacies on progress, are building their candicacies on the destruction of the Bush administration.

It may be the Status Quo, but it really sucks. Thanks for doing your part to support the Status Quo, Norman.

Just my opinion,

Ross

[uncas]

Sometimes it is confusing when a response is limited to only a portion of the original post. :)
As I interpreted it, you would have voted for DeLay BECAUSE he was suddenly a Democrat.

[Phillip Allen]

I have inside info on the Clintons. I've met Hilly and my sister helped them both with their first "run" for the Arkansas Atty Gen. I despise the pair...but it's just personal

[Phillip Allen]

sorry...(all better now?) :)

[geeman]

So ,if Shrub resigned,,we'd have the Shooter in,,thats a good thing? lol

[uncas]

I don't like them, but I don't dispise them.
My only inside track with the Clintons is one of their old law professors at Yale.
He doesn't say much except Hillary is smarter! Granted, I don't ask him for the nitty gritty. :)

[Norman Bernstein]

The thread title is an altogether different issue.


Well, as I said, the thread title was simply an echo of what was in the original post... although there are at least a few here too dense to see the failed attempt at humor here. I didn't personally say I hated Bush: I don't. I simply disagree with virtually everything he has done while in office. (I say 'virtually' because I've actually complimented the guy once or twice).

As for the titles of the graphs themselves, they came out of a blog, so you can't attribute the 'hate' word to Gallup, or the poll... or even me. The data, on the other hand, is indeed a distillation of the results of the Gallup poll over the timeframe indicated.... and the data is the significant part of the post, not the adjective.

[pcford]

I have inside info on the Clintons. I've met Hilly and my sister helped them both with their first "run" for the Arkansas Atty Gen. I despise the pair...but it's just personal

The Clinton haters are such a strange bunch. Clinton was the best Republican president of the last 40 years. You certainly can't call him a liberal.

Maybe they just distrust anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

[uncas]

Thanks. I am glad to know I'm dense enough to realize it was a failed attempt at humor. :)
I'm not into humor today.

[Phillip Allen]

He is probably confusing "smarter" with something else...she is certainly bitter about many things...and hateful and grasping and treads on those in her way and ignores the plights of those who are of no (perceived) direct use to herself and...and....

[uncas]

Phillip. You may be right. Perhaps, as he is well into his 80's he is being politically correct.
:)

[Norman Bernstein]

He is probably confusing "smarter" with something else...she is certainly bitter about many things...and hateful and grasping and treads on those in her way and ignores the plights of those who are of no (perceived) direct use to herself and...and....

So, it's bad form for anyone to say that they 'hate' the President...but OK to proclaim one of his rivals as 'hateful'?

Double standard here?

[Phillip Allen]

The Clinton haters are such a strange bunch. Clinton was the best Republican president of the last 40 years. You certainly can't call him a liberal.

Maybe they just distrust anyone with an IQ above room temperature.

I suspect that Hilly is a lot like McNamara when it comes to attitudes about others' IQ's

[uncas]

Well, if I have said somewhere else, as I certainly have not here, that I hate ( which to me is a strong word ) a president, I don't recall. Now I very much dislike Jackson. I distrust Bush, Clintons. Not hate.
So no double standards.
In fact, I tried to say that polls should be based on preformance.
But remember, this entire thread was supposted to be humorous.
So, what I say is moot!

[High C]

The Clinton haters are such a strange bunch....

Those who equate disaproval with hate are a strange bunch. :rolleyes:

[Phillip Allen]

If I were trapped in a room with either of them (Clintons) I would certainly try to talk to them...dunno if talk would be political, that would be up to them as I would not initiate it. I’d prolly have better luck talking to Bill than Hill.

[Norman Bernstein]

But remember, this entire thread was supposted to be humorous.


It was? Hmmm.... I started the thread... and didn't think it was in the least bit humorous! :)

Edited to add: Sorry, the title of the thread was intended to be 'humorous' in a darkly sarcastic way... but the content was not intended to be humorous at all!

[John of Phoenix]

Harry S Truman:
If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.

Nixon was a crook, in spite of his dramatic denials.
Carter was impotent, in spite of his dramatic rescue attempt.
Bush will ultimately answer to the God he claims talks to him.

[uncas]

Norman.. You also posted this

although there are at least a few here too dense to see the failed attempt at humor here.

Hey, Phillip... Just to pull your leg. If you are trapped in the same room with the Clintons, remember, they are trapped in there with you as well... :)
Actually, I would not mind having a discussion with either one of them. I might have trouble believing what they say but that is a problem I have with most politicians.

[Phillip Allen]

Norman.. You also posted this

although there are at least a few here too dense to see the failed attempt at humor here.

Hey, Phillip... Just to pull your leg. If you are trapped in the same room with the Clintons, remember, they are trapped in there with you as well... :)
Actually, I would not mind having a discussion with either one of them. I might have trouble believing what they say but that is a problem I have with most politicians.

I would gladly engage in conversation with either of them...(perhaps I don't hate them after all)

[Ross M]

Norman.. You also posted this

although there are at least a few here too dense to see the failed attempt at humor here...

Just a sideways slide, Uncas/Jamie. Don't be fooled by the feint.

Destruction is so much easier than construction. And more fun, at least for the limited.

Ross

[uncas]

Ross.
No problem. I got a few pennies in the bank from another thread. Made my day, or at least improved it.
Then again, I'm dense. :)

[Phillip Allen]

Norman.. You also posted this

although there are at least a few here too dense to see the failed attempt at humor here.

Hey, Phillip... Just to pull your leg. If you are trapped in the same room with the Clintons, remember, they are trapped in there with you as well... :)
Actually, I would not mind having a discussion with either one of them. I might have trouble believing what they say but that is a problem I have with most politicians.

additionally, I would gladly converse with: Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot and a lot of others ... EXCEPT ...I would have pointed questions for them...

[uncas]

Maybe on the phone with them. Not sure I would nec. be comfortable face to face without back up. Many that tried to discuss things with these guys found themselves buried in an umarked grave.

[Phillip Allen]

yes...

[Norman Bernstein]

Maybe on the phone with them. Not sure I would nec. be comfortable face to face without back up. Many that tried to discuss things with these guys found themselves buried in an umarked grave.

I think that deserves some back-up... it's quite an assertion you're making, uncas.... care to prove it?

[Memphis Mike]

"Who is the most hated poster...Norman or Dutch?"

Anyone see any consistency? The question suggests that both are hated and that to the extent that all others pale in comparison...

I'd take Dutch over that big mouthed, fat assed Bernstein anyday.

At least Dutch has some original thoughts in his head.

[Phillip Allen]

. :) .

[Norman Bernstein]

I'd take Dutch over that big mouthed, fat assed Bernstein anyday.

At least Dutch has some original thoughts in his head.

:D :D :D

That I am big-mouthed is fairly evident, so there's no way I'd deny it.

However, you'd have to assert some proof that I'm 'fat assed', MM.... or apologize, like any gentleman would.

(I won't be holding my breath on the latter)

[Memphis Mike]

You looked like a porker to me in the video of you turning your boat. Bald too.:D

[John of Phoenix]

Yer gettin' bitter Mike.

[uncas]

Norman
You can't be serious.
Ya really think there are not a few graves out there with individuals who either spoke out against the above or communicated with them directly.
Granted, many who might have discussed things with them were afraid to as an unmarked grave was not that appealing. If it didn't happen, why were Hilter's generals not willing to object to Hilter's appraoch to running the war directly? Must have been fear of where they would end up.
Example with Stalin...Trotsky...he tried to escape to Mexico or there abouts. Somehow he ended up with an ice axe in his head in the late 30's. Just by coincidence.

[Memphis Mike]

Yer gettin' bitter Mike.

Yep , I bitterly hate all politics and discussions thereof. I have a strong disdain for all politicians on both sides of the fence. They're all crooks, regardless of party.

The Weenies are doing the most vocalizing nowadays, hence my utter disdain for them.

They're no better than Rush and Al.

[uncas]

Gee Mike
And a good morning to you too!

[Scubastud]

You looked like a porker to me in the video of you turning your boat. Bald too.:D

Your looking at a picture of the guy from NY

[Norman Bernstein]

Norman
You can't be serious.
Ya really think there are not a few graves out there with individuals who either spoke out against the above or communicated with them directly.
Granted, many who might have discussed things with them were afraid to as an unmarked grave was not that appealing. If it didn't happen, why were Hilter's generals not willing to object to Hilter's appraoch to running the war directly? Must have been fear of where they would end up.
Example with Stalin...Trotsky...he tried to escape to Mexico or there abouts. Somehow he ended up with an ice axe in his head in the late 30's. Just by coincidence.

sorry, I misread your posting.... I thought the conversation was about talking to the Clintons... didn't realized it had drifted to Hitler, Pol Pot, etc.... I apologize.

(See, HighC? It's not all that difficult.... when you are caught in an erroneous statement, you apologize... it's what humans do :D )

[uncas]

No problem.
Was wondering where you were coming from...A little wind change on the thread.

[Rick Clark]

so...are you saying that they're pricks... :)

Well if you want to call them that, that's up to you, but as you very well know that they started fights that was not finished in the first war and will be long on the second one.
Stupid is stupid does!:)

[Cuyahoga Chuck]

We have to let the brew cooked up in the White House ferment a little more. There will come a day when everyone will be stung by the smell.

Charlie

[Norman Bernstein]

I'm a lot more interested in the point of time when the previous Bush-defenders finally get overwhelmed by everything that the guy has done in office to trample on the Constitution... and, just as many House and Senate Republicans are doing, begin to 'distance' themselves from him.

Reckoning can't be all that far away. It won't take much: let Karl Rove be indicted, let Bush try to rattle the sabers for a military campaign against Iran, let him publish a few more 'signing statements' which further indicate that he doesn't think he's bound by any laws whatsoever..... that, and a few other events, and I suspect that, suddenly, the ones who defended him so intensely are going to be flipping back through the bilge, editing their posts :D

[uncas]

I guess this place is as good as any. Did not want to post on another thread and get into a p...ing contest.
Lets look at this.

Okay. If Bush is shown to have broken the law with proof. Impeach.
Fine then you have
Cheney who probably has done similar things if Bush has
( proof needed )
Impeach
Then ya got the Speaker of the House who I am sure is no cleaneer tthan the above
Impeach

Now ya start working on the Secretaries...All of them and I suspect that if they have followed the above characters, they may also be subject to impeachment.
So on we go! Impeach, then again, and angain, and again...

Just out of curiosity, when would it stop if people think beginning with the president, everyone associated with the Oval office should be impeached.?
Of course, these proceeding will take away from the other problems this country is facing...but what the heck. By 2010, we should have made it down the entire list.

[High C]

....(See, HighC? It's not all that difficult.... when you are caught in an erroneous statement, you apologize... it's what humans do :D )

...and my history here reflects several such apologies, but I'm struggling to understand what I would apologize for when it is you who challenged my honesty because you don't believe that my outrage at the misuse of a symbol is genuine.

There's a lot you don't understand, and frankly, if you would bother to notice, you'd realize that your own approval rating around here is plummeting faster than the President's. :rolleyes:

[uncas]

High C
I agree with you on a lot of points but
I do not think Norman has a plunging rating. I have found him to be agreeable. We have our differences but he is willing to listen to me and I to him. Sure we often disagree but we allow each other the opportunity to do so.
I keep hoping there is a happy medium.

[Norman Bernstein]

...and my history here reflects several such apologies, but I'm struggling to understand what I would apologize for when it is you who challenged my honesty because you don't believe that my outrage at the misuse of a symbol is genuine.

You made a groundless and baseless accusation against participants here in the bilge, with regard to their criticism of Bush with regard to the use of the 'Mission Accomplished' photo-op. The accusation was totally unwarranted; not a single person in that thread said anything whatsoever which would demena or insult them members of the crew of that aircraft carrier. Your accusation wasn't simply a political comment, it was a personal attack on people who didn't deserve it. Personally, I could care less... but any decent person would apologize.


...There's a lot you don't understand, and frankly, if you would bother to notice, you'd realize that your own approval rating around here is plummeting faster than the President's. :rolleyes:

You're right, there's a great deal I don't understand, and it's one reason I enjoy political debate.... civil political debate, free of personal attacks and vindictiveness.

As for my 'approval rating', I don't come here for your approval, nor anyone elses'. I could care less of what you think of me.

[High C]

High C
I agree with you on a lot of points but
I do not think Norman has a plunging rating. I have found him to be agreeable. We have our differences but he is willing to listen to me and I to him. Sure we often disagree but we allow each other the opportunity to do so.
I keep hoping there is a happy medium.


Jaimie, did you see the things he said to me yesterday? He's at it again in the post just above. He's totally full of crap, but I won't waste any more of my time explaining it. Others have complained of his behavior as well. Oh well. It's his problem.

[Norman Bernstein]

Uncas wrote:


Okay. If Bush is shown to have broken the law with proof. Impeach.


I don't think anyone can make a claim that Bush has broken a specific law... because he makes a claim of 'interpretation', so until the Supreme Court weighs in, the question will be unsettled.

Everyone has an opinion about this. Mine is simple: until someone can show me the explicit wording of the Constitution which says that a President's power as 'Commander in Chief' trumps all other provisions of the Constitution, especially the Fourth Ammendment, my own opinion is that he has indeed broken the law. The notion the he does have this power is, as I said, an 'interpretation', and the only branch of government empowered to interpret the Constitution is the Supreme Court. There are explicit words in the Constitution that say that the President is charged with faithfully defending the Constitution and the laws of the United States... indeed, the guy swore an oath to do so.

[uncas]

High C
No, I didn't.
I may have, for a variety of reasons skipped, the thread.
Hell, High C. No one is perfect. I have gotten into some serious p....ing contests in the past which on later reflection, I wish I had not gotten into. And made an idiot out of myself in the process. These contests have a tendency to backfire.
I'm sorry if it happened and again, no...Missed them.

[troutman]

Actually there was a graph for Lincoln. . . .it was called the election of 1864.

[High C]

...made an idiot out of myself in the process...

I've never seen you do anything of the sort. :cool:

[Mrleft8]

Is there a graph for Jackson?
Michael, or Reggie? :D

[uncas]

No High C.
I chastized myself! I'm the worst critic.
You didn't..Ya didn't have to.... :)

[BrianW]

As for the titles of the graphs themselves, they came out of a blog, so you can't attribute the 'hate' word to Gallup, or the poll... or even me.


Sorry, the title of the thread was intended to be 'humorous' in a darkly sarcastic way...

???

[Norman Bernstein]

The title of the thread was indeed mine, BrianW, simply echoing the title of the charts, which I did not create.... they came out of a blog, as I said, but are (presumably) based on the actual Gallup poll numbers....

In any event, the only meaningful part of the opening posting of the thread was the content of the graph. Unfortunately, the admittedly poor choice of the title of the thread detracted from the content.

My apologies.

[Phillip Allen]

That title certainly had a lot to do with my reading and finding exception to its thrust...

[Norman Bernstein]

That title certainly had a lot to do with my reading and finding exception to its thrust...

Suppose I changed the title... and edited the graph titles to remove the offensive word.

Would it change the significance of the graphs?

[Cuyahoga Chuck]

Up to this point it's, probably, Abraham Lincoln. But, that will change soon.

Charlie

[Northernguy59]

Whom produced the graph????