Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Noah H
Lv 5
Noah H asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

How Can This Be True?

The lead story on Yahoo today says that historians now list George W. Bush as only our sixth worst President.

How can this be true?

What in the world did James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Franklin Pierce, William Henry Harrison and Warren G. Harding do that could possibly be worse than Bush?

By the way, Reagan is ranked number 10. Clinton 15 and Carter 25.

Update:

For those who say It is too soon to tell just how bad Bush was of this country and the world:

History will not vindicate Bush.

History will vilify him.

Bush has not left any legacy, only liabilities.

Our great grandchildren will still be paying for his incompetence and corruption.

In time historians will move George W. Bush to his proper place at the bottom of the list.

14 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    The evaluations were made by contemporary historians.

    Harrison didn't really have a chance since he died a month into his term. If you think W was so bad, think how much worse the others must have been. You should notice that all but Harding (1921-23)served in the middle of the 19rh century so we have had a pretty good batch for the past 150 years. This makes W the worst of our modern presidents. Maybe that distinction will be enough to make you happy.

  • nomad
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    I'm surprised Reagan is all the way down to 10. I would have expected him to be much closer to the top. I can see Clinton somewhere in the teens, carter should be in the 30's. Bush, well time will tell.

  • 1 decade ago

    Because they have an agenda. They also make the disclaimer that people's views of a president change with time. That means if they had sex the night before, and read the name of a president, they would rank them high. The ranking is all based on their mood.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It's way to early for history to weigh in on Bush.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    I can understand him being a tad bit better than Pierce but where was Nixon on the list?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Not surprising from a Liberal Bias news network.

    What qualifies said "Historians" to determine the worst presidents.

    Carter, FDR, and Clinton were FAR worse than GW Bush could ever hope to be.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    what did bush do wrong, the librials blame bush for there mistakes. we cant blame licoln for the civil war. bush really was one of our better presidents. he had to go through tougher things than clinton(who btw ropped the white house and smoked pot). carter sold the panama canal and now our destroyers and carriers are weak because the cannal is to small. panama doesnt have the money to fix it.

  • Lurch
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Your post is more evidence that the only people who put Bush as the worst are those who haven't studied U.S. History in depth.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Well because it isn't. If this is so true and accurate then why did Clinton move up 7 spots from 2000.

  • 1 decade ago

    What does it say about the credibility of this poll when Clinton is only rated 15th when he should be rated next to last? This is only possible thanks to Jimmy Carter sucking as badly as he did.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.