Why would John edaward be a good president? Why would he be a bad president? Explain?
453967
DISCLAIMER:  I am NOT a Democrat!!  Dumb Publican bozos!  I'm an "apathetic liberal" which means I'm really an independent moderate voter that's not willing to compromise my principles to vote for "the lesser of two evils."  I hate that stupid Publican demonizing garbage.\n\nDISCLAIMER 2:  Although I have successfully predicted the outcome of the last 7 elections, I do not make this prediction until the election year.  This is only hypothetical at this point!\n\nJohn Edwards would make for a very boring president.  That means he would probably make for a good candidate for the next election.  My vote on him is "milquetoast."\n\nIssues that will get attacked:\n\n* Closely involved in Clinton's acquittal from the ML scandal.\n\n* A lawyer (although *I* realize this isn't necessarily a bad thing)\n\n* He is a senators and senators usually don't know how to do sound bites.  May seem too intellectual to the generally stupid populace.\n\n* Book title was "Four Trials!" BOOOORING!\n\n* The wealthy elites will hate some of his policy recommendations.\n\n* "smellyfoot" got her facts bass-ackwards, but he did take a third of the settlement moneys that the companies had to pay out.  Of course, you do that by padding the amount you really want with the lawyer's fees...  So did he really "steal" that amount?  Well, it will get debated for sure.  And of course the Publicans will make ads that are equally bass-ackwards for an ignorant public.\n\nBonus points:\n\n* Working class family background/ rags-to-riches story\n* First generation college student to lawyer!\n* Wrote a book!\n* If he can again avoid negative campaigning (takes talent!)\n* The wealthy elites will hate some of his policy recommendations\n\nOverall, an average Democrat candidate.  Not very controversial, but not very exciting either.  Just right for a country that likes bland sugary food.
430878
Yeah,Good or bad your in the history books.Heck of a reason to be President though.Don't you think Mr.Bush?
865987
I must say the teacher who dumped this on you has a funny idea of American politics.  But nevermind.\n\nThe only one that might fail to explain why the president is responsible for being a strong leader would be "the weakness of Congress."  Congress is not actually weak.  Bungling, self-interested, possibly even corrupt, but not really weak.
1177406
I really find it hard to understand. He is well intentioned and really believes he is the only one in the world that is right.\n\nHe has done more damage to this country then good leaders will be able to fix in 50 years.
501711
You know, you make it awkward to answer a question when you start with "Why" about something we may not agree is true.  It's like the guy who is asked, "When did you stop beating your wife?"  The assumption is part of the question, and no way to answer the question directly without accepting the assumption.\n\nI do not believe all the good presidents have been assassinated.  For one thing, you are not looking far enough back.  Jefferson was a good president, for example.  The definition of what is a good president relies more on what party you believe in than anything, and since there has never YET been a Libertarian president (unless you count ones with a very libertarian style before the party was formed), I could argue that there have never been any good presidents.  I think, for example, that when you ask whether JFK was a good president, in addition to party politics, you have to consider the martyrdom factor.  Who, today, would want to say he was not a good president, when he died so dramatically, practically right in front of our eyes?  And he was young, and had a lovely young family, and so people would hesitate to remember that he was, after all, a machine politician.  He was Democratic Party all the way, with all the favors called in and so forth, and you could love him or hate him as you chose until he died.  Then it was "Don't speak ill of the dead."  \n\nLincoln seems like a wonderful person to us today, but there were people who hated him fiercely in his day, and not just because of the Civil War, either.  Some believed he was not as "honest" as his reputation made out, some felt he was supportive of the wrong people, and so on.  I like what I know about him, but I know others did not.\n\nAs to why Bush has not been assassinated, I think the main reason is, with the security he has, it would have to be a suicide mission, and might not succeed even then.  Also, it's not worth it.  We have a Vice-President who does not look very promising as a replacement.  Better just vote him and his party out.  Vote Libertarian for a change!
435246
no  he  was  a  good   president.
819905
i have to agree with you.  he may not be visually appealing to everyone, but he is very educated and has some really good ideas.  His insight is often over looked.  Its a shame really.  Also too bad he has such a bad reputation, i honestly think if there were more people like him this would be a better nation.
523384
Some democrat ideas are good, not all republican ideas are bad.\n\nThis president has done things the dems proposed in the past but he get assailed by them anyway.  He's reached out to them only to get spit in the face.  Kennedy helped with NCLB now he blames the president for all the problems and calls him cheap names.\n\nThe dems used to be honorable (as a group of politicians could be) now they're just the party of hypocrisy and denigration.
1014434
John Stewart, is a shoe in for President, and so is Arnold, if he wasn't an immigrant.  Now Martha Stewart wouldn't make a bad Senator, seeing as she recruites the youth to do her business... XD\nOh, yeah, Oprah Whimphrey wouldn't be a bad candidate for vice president.  Give it up to Marilyn Manson for Secretary of State, and those boys from Pennywise would be prefect for the House.
570520
My position is that we all must respect and honor our elected leaders no matter their faults or shortcomings. Whatever power they are wielding is given to them by God. As a matter of fact, they represent God. Like you, I take exception to anyone insulting or bad-mouthing President George Bush using profane language and any available media at their disposal. In many developing nations, calling the president a fool, a moron or dumb could land you in the worst trouble you can ever imagine. It's unfortunate that Americans are taking their freedom of speech too far and using it as a licence to insult those in authority. Honestly, George Bush is not a fool or dumb or how do we explain how he won the US presidential election twice. Let's give honor to whom honor is due, let's respect the president.
1152225
First, I am curious where you heard this. I am very active in the political internet world and I haven't heard of this!\n\nSecondly - he can't do that. He has served as president and no matter which party he goes to, he can't be president again.\n\nWhich is a good thing!
118121
I think "Dubya" is a terrific president. He has done a lot for the safety of the nation from foreign countries, unlike Clinton. Our gov't is always shown to be the bad guy, but that's because of the liberal media. Conservatives are condemned for ridding the world of the evils, but liberals are praised for sparing them, consequently causing more turmoil. I don't really want to get started, so I'll cut it short. President Bush is wonderful.
93853
I think Hillary would be good but i also think that john McCain would be a good president. It's gonna be hard for me to vote if those 2 are running against eachother.
1068490
Although I think Bush is a poor president in key areas, DJ seems to have some really good points.  I'll acknowledge that Bush is a man of action and that many of his actions especially right after 911 were on target.   However,\n\nWhen it comes to his overall leadership, he is missing several of the most important leadership qualities.  #1: Communication skills.  Without any doubt he will go down as the anti-thesis of Reagan who was our "great communicator"  Bush couldn't convince the devil: the qualities of an airconditioner, and he's from Texas.  He makes everyone I know cringe when he speaks - even my conservative friends can't stand this fatal flaw of his presidency.  \n\n2nd - he makes up his mind quickly and never changes it - good quality after 911 for a while, but he can't adapt and overcome.  When he's wrong - he won't admit it - ever.  (No real plan to win the peace in Iraq after the regime was overthrown - and 3 years later - still no real plan -  not willing to work with the U.N. peacekeeping forces as a legitimate transfer of power in the region)\n3rd flaw - he's appointed some inefficient lack luster people to key positions in the government - FEMA, Treasury, Attorney General, CIA, Defense, State Dept. and the Supreme Court, to name a few apparently unimportant areas.  Many of these people couldn't run a horse show let alone a key gov't agency.\n\nIt's time for new leadership - impeachment is very unlikely.  Lets get someone next time that at least knows how to speak English clearly- and that has true leadership qualities.
164106
Of course he means well. He is not perfect, I am sure he didn't just decide to try to mess things up so america would hate him. WHich is why I 100% support him, because he is human, and I know he is a good person, so he should be given the benefit of the doubt. His terms as president habe been rough, and alot has been accomplished, and he has had alot to deal with during his presidency...he has done a good job, i think.
1062703
The worst ever... its kind of hard.  Clinton sunk the level of President to a new low, that'll be hard to beat.  Carter had his "malaise" (well, he was lame but not corrupt, just his cabinet was).  FDR and the new deal, sounded good until it was realized he used public money to support private industry and he created a permanent welfare state, which as everyone knows was the beginning of the end of personal responsibility.  JFK did a great job rallying around the flag and making people happy they were American again, but he was lost on the international stage and "Camelot" was only really good if you were rich, a democrat and from Massachusettes, but despite all that he wasn't that bad.  \n\nThere was Daley, sure.  But don't leave out all the others who sat in congress for years and didn't consider themselves corrupt because they weren't stealing money directly, just funneling it to people who would eventually employee them one they "retired".\n\nAnd just to appease the whiny libs out there, yes I acknowledge there have been corrupt republicans out there, but just look at White Water and all the people involved who "suicided" or just were killed under suspicious "accidental" circumstances and you'll realize that "Monica-gate" was one of the more elaborate ruses in the history of politics.  There may be some bad republicans, but the democrats have a time honored tradition of dishonesty and corruption.\n\nAnd why are the people answering this question bringing the authors appearance and spelling into the argument?  Are you third graders who can't form a coherent thought ?  Grow up!  We know you are upset because year after year you vote the party line and continue sending lame thieves into office.  Just look at New Orleans putting Nagin back into office and tell me I'm wrong.
889378
JOHN 16... are you dyslexic ?  \nYou said, "Liberals always say he is a "bad guy" --- then defend him."  \nIn my language, english, he wasn't defending him... he was saying it's not about him.\nI am a Liberal... and I have never defended him nor have I heard any liberal defend him either...  \nDo you stay up all night making this bush-it up ?\nWhat scares me isn't that you vote... it's that you breed !!!\nNow that's a crime against humanity !