413

While Dick Cheney has endorsed Harris, there have been no comments from other senior Republicans from Bush’s era

The MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell this week hit out at George W Bush, the Republican former president, for refusing to weigh in on America’s looming presidential election.

“All any decent person wants him to do is to say, ‘Don’t vote for Donald Trump, and here’s why,’ and he won’t even do that,” O’Donnell told the Fast Politics podcast, of the Republican president who was in office from 2001 to 2009.

Increasingly, Bush – and some other top Republicans from his political era – are looking lonely in their ongoing refusal to take a side in an election in which many have warned that US democracy is under threat from Trump’s open sympathies with autocracy.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 136 points 3 weeks ago

big fucking tough guy when it comes to sending other peoples' kids out to die for a bullshit war based on outright lies

but when it's time to actually take the correct stance on something, he buckles like a lawn chair under the average cod cosplaying maga chud

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 42 points 3 weeks ago

I was living in NYC before and after 9/11.

The Ground Zero pit stayed undeveloped until 2007 because that's how long it took the money men to decide which insurer would pay for what. George W. never bothered to push them to hurry things, because it was vital that every single penny be accounted for. No problem with starting a war with lies, but money must be guarded to the utmost.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 21 points 3 weeks ago

They wanted it to stay an open wound because it let them be more jingo

[-] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 4 points 3 weeks ago

"Jingoistic" is a phrase I've not heard in a long time.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

cod cosplaying maga chud

Had to recalibrate my mental image from the fish costume I imagined before remembering that Call of Duty exists 😄

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I'm pretty sure his endorsement would be a negative. Same with the Cheney one, I can't think of anyone that would look at that and be like: yes, I'll go with Cheney. If anything it would turn people off.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 54 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Hilarious to me that all the media spent time rehabbing Bush's image and he can't even manage to match Dick fucking Cheney?

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 33 points 3 weeks ago

Cheney is pissed at his daughter losing her family-guaranteed sinecure in Wyoming to a Trumpie, because he's invested in his family's political legacy.

Bush has no real beef with the Trumps and isn't trying to give his daughters a leg up into the next administration.

Totally different set of political incentives to endorse.

[-] 5h17h34d@lemmy.world 42 points 3 weeks ago

Second worst president ever.

He's considered a war criminal in most countries outside of North America and Europe.

[-] crusa187@lemmy.ml 31 points 3 weeks ago

Still waiting to see W, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz convicted of war crimes for all the torture they oversaw at those cia black sites, among other things. Absolutely villainous.

[-] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Bush and Cheney basically fabricated the entire Iraq War and the only people to come out on top were Exxon Fucking Mobil who took majority control of the Iraqi oilfields, and then the executive in charge of the operation, Rex Tillerson, got appointed to the Trump admin.

Thousands dead for greed. America's hands stained in blood and grease for generations.

Still only second worst tho, no disagreement on that.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Bush and Cheney basically fabricated the entire Iraq War and the only people to come out on top were Exxon Fucking Mobil

Be fair. Halliburton did pretty well for themselves as well.

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Wow, Rumsfeld died three years ago - I hadn't heard that. Death at age 88 is almost infant mortality for a war criminal Republican. Count Dracula-Wolfowitz is still going strong, however.

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 36 points 3 weeks ago

I mean, who's surprised by this? Dubya was always a dumbass, and essentially the beta version of Trump.

[-] TammyTobacco@lemmy.ml 19 points 3 weeks ago

W was always a tool, a blank slate for his owners to use. The guy has no thoughts of his own so I'm not surprised.

[-] the_post_of_tom_joad@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

He may not have been a genius mastermind but he's smart enough not to be absolved of the evils he committed. Blank slate is a juuuuust a bit too far for me

Just saying

[-] 474D@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Dubya was actually quite intelligent, just a shit speaker and an asshole.

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Not sure he was even a shit speaker if we compare him to Trump. His sentences at least made sense. I'm sure he just wants to be done with it all. He retired from office 15 years ago, and he lives in Texas I thought. If he endorses Harris, Trumpees will lash out at him. We can call that cowardly to not speak out do to fear of retribution but he is 78 years old. 78 year olds shouldnt be key factors in planning for our futures, they should be relaxing and planning their next health care visits that we have figured out a way they can access. The average male in the U.S. dies at 74. Let the old man paint a few more pictures on canvas if so chooses and pass in his time. That said... Wish Trump would do the same.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago

People keep repeating that, where was this intelligence when he was president?

And on that note, what actions have ever displayed this “quite intelligent” side?

[-] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

George Lakoff is on record saying he heard him give a speech displaying masterful rhetoric. Then he lost an election to a "bubba", and vowed, quote, "I'm never gonna get out-bubba'd again".

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world 33 points 3 weeks ago

Why did anyone ever think he was any good? The folksy paintings? The aw-shucks friendship with Michelle Obama?

This dipshit has the blood of millions on his hands. He gave us Alito. He destroyed as much of the administrative state as he could. His CIA daddy stole his election.

Can you imagine our world today if Gore had gotten in?

Fuck Cheney too, he only cares because Trump was mean to his shithead daughter.

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 19 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Can you imagine our world today if Gore had gotten in?

It's not very well-remembered today that Clinton's administration ended with a budget surplus of hundreds of billions of dollars or that Gore was by far the most prominent voice in the world sounding the alarm about global warming. With a Gore victory we could have been debt-free as a nation by now and actually taking significant steps towards ending our dependency on fossil fuels; instead the debt is $35 fucking trillion dollars (which is so enormous it sounds like a joke) and the only reason this isn't a bigger problem is that we're cooking ourselves off the planet anyway and no amount of debt is going to matter.

Somewhat tangential, but "global warming" was always a weak formulation of the problem and "climate change" even more so. I prefer "anthropogenic runaway global heating" which more accurately frames the actual problem and has the handy acronym ARGH.

[-] celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago

Never forget, the election was literally stolen from Gore. The electoral equivalent of the OJ Simpson trial.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Bushes are morally bankrupt anyways. Two war criminals and one of them, Laura, killed her friend in a car accident where she ran a stop sign.

[-] Thrillhouse@lemmy.world 25 points 3 weeks ago

I wonder if this is because W benefitted from the same ratfuckery that Trump uses (Roger Stone, Brooks Bros Riot, etc.)

[-] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago

Choose a side you fucking coward, Bush.

[-] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 27 points 3 weeks ago

I've never seen a Bush miss an opportunity to be on the wrong side of history.

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

He wants Republicans policies but not Trump. He's stuck like a lot of other people. Unfortunately, most of those people will hold their noses and vote for Trump and hope for the best. That's the two-party system for ya.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] YeetPics@mander.xyz 19 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Trump is the only chance gwb has of someone else having more war crimes than him; making him look less evil.

These are Republicans, they only ever serve their own best interests.

[-] aluminium@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago

Now watch that drive

[-] kittenzrulz123 13 points 3 weeks ago

Its Bush, that war criminal can go to hell

[-] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

Yep, but it would be nice if he took Trump with him.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nemonic187@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

Lol. Why are we still pretending to give a shit about W?

[-] riodoro1@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Him being informed of WTC attack did make a hell of a meme template. Maybe that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] NineMileTower@lemmy.world 13 points 3 weeks ago

Oh, now everyone is surprised when he acts like a piece of shit? My good friend growing up died in Iraq in 2008. For what?

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

Centrists are so disappointed that senpai didn't notice them.

[-] SassyRamen@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

He's a war criminal at large who is running from the Hague, he's obviously going to be on the bad guys side.

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

Former presidents dont typically get involved in presidential politics(especially of their own party ) after they leave.

They'll typically stump for candidates in their own party if they were a popular former president.

You could argue that his lack of involvement with Trump's campaign is pretty telling.

[-] Notserious@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

Didn’t he start the stacking the supreme court? Could have been his dad. Jr was just stupider.

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

No, that was Ronald Reagan, who gave us most of the SCOTUS justices who picked W over Gore to be President in the 2000 election despite his having lost.

[-] Bonesince1997@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago

Aww, he's just a painter with a soft spot for traitors.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

To Bush, being morally indefensible is a plus.

[-] norimee@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

That would be his chance to do something decent for once.

Reminds me of when Pink wrote a song for him Dear Mr. President and we thought he is the worst that can happen...
"How do you sleep while the rest of us cry?"

[-] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

Morally indefensible but thank the Lord we don’t have any morals to worry about

[-] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 3 weeks ago

Cheney, you bag of roasting chicken shit, take Bush hunting and talk to him.

[-] Anamnesis@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

"Man far worse than Trump refuses to condemn Trump" lol big surprise.

[-] HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com 5 points 3 weeks ago

Hes in a special position. If trump did not exist he would be in the running for worst president.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] steve_floof@lemm.ee 4 points 3 weeks ago

My moral barometer, George W. Bush

[-] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

The need for validation from war criminals is the problem along with this silent shift to the right by Dems. This would be a good time for Dems to actually become a party for the working class/poor.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
413 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19050 readers
3262 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS