Time for democrats to admit they underestimated President Bush

[SpencerH]

Bob Woodward has been making the rounds of the talk shows touting his new book Bush At War. What is particularly interesting to me about that has been Woodwards descriptions of Bush's dominance of the cabinet meetings.

Similarly, in Bob Novaks column we get more evidence that Bush is the guy in charge.

There has been a lot of slurs aimed at Bush's (lack of) intelligence and that it was Cheney who was actually running the country. Given these new indications that Bush really is a "leader" (if not a rocket scientist), isnt it time for the democrats (and some republicans) to admit that they've underestimated Bush's abilities and to re-assess him in this new light?

[DinoDoc]

"Misunderestimated" him, you mean. I agree that it is false to say that the man is stupid.

[Arrian]

I would say the Dems underestimated his appeal, and more importantly, overestimated THEIR appeal.

-Arrian

[Chris 62]

I had this discussion elsewhere, many like to call bush "Dumbya", and other such nonsense, while in the mean time, he gets what he aims for, his popularity is through the roof, and he shows REAL leadership.

If he is so stupid, and he keeps thwarting them, what does that make him opposition?

[SpencerH]

Well I think the difference is that this is more than just opinion one way or another. Now there is clear evidence that while he's not an 'intellectual' he is a leader (just as Reagan was).

[Chris 62]

No, he's no genius, neither was Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, JFK....

I think the point is made along those lines, we didn't elect him to be a genius, he's there to lead the nation.

[GePap]

Many people do underestimate the man. He isnt stupid, but he is also not intellectually curios, which is not a good thing.

He is personable and likebale, but places too much emphasis on strict loyalty (look at how he treats Schroeder now) as the most important virtue.

The Americna people have always liked him, even when he came in he had an approval raing higher than what he got in the election.

All this said, I still despise this admin. from the depths of my soul, and think that in 10 year, IWe all will be paying a high price for their actions today.

[Dis]

I'm not a democrat.

And I did not underestimate. I'm still not impressed with President Bush's actions.

One thing I will admit is I thank god (sometimes satan) that Bush is in the white house and not Gore. But there are many other men that could have handled this terrorism thing better. Republicans are really starting to piss me off. The only thing I like about republicans is keeping the goverment small and not passing a bunch of bull**** laws. But here they are doing that very thing with regards to national security.

[-Jrabbit]

Preface: Choices for Americans in the last Presidential election were pathetic.

If the ability to use tragedy to undermine the bill of Rights and boost one's popularity, all while deflecting attention away from woeful economic performance and disdain for the environment is what now passes for leadership, then I guess Bush was uderestimated.

BTW, no one I know ever thought Cheney was in charge. But Bush Sr's ongoing vendetta against Saddam has always struck me as suspicious...

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Dissident
I'm not a democrat.

Great! A lot of liberals have put out a lot of crap about how stupid Bush is and how he's just a puppet. AFAIK this is the first time we get to see just whats really what in the White House. Bush is the one pulling the strings (as he should).

[Caligastia]

I couldnt stand Bush when he was campaigning in 2000, but now I have to admit he has shown real leadership. He is also more down to earth than Gore.

[Clear Skies]

There's the small matter of him actually having lost the 2000 election, but we'll pass over that...

[SpencerH]

0.000001

[Guest]

If the ability to use tragedy to undermine the bill of Rights and boost one's popularity, all while deflecting attention away from woeful economic performance and disdain for the environment is what now passes for leadership, then I guess Bush was uderestimated.

this is exactly why the Dems and Reps are one and the same- carreer-mongering figureheads. The Dems should have took a pit-bull approach and attack the Bush administration on all of the fronts you mentioned, but instead they acted like emasculated pups whose only concern was a nice, safe issue like prescription meds for the elderly.

[Clear Skies]

Originally posted by SpencerH
0.000001

Truth not troll. Simple statement of fact.