Talk:George W. Bush/Archive 11

message: :*Bush is extremely unpopular in most of the world outside the U.S., with many holding a dislike of his person and policies - even amongst a significant part of the populations of U.S. allies such as the UK. He is quite often seen as the personification of all that people dislike about the US, cf. anti-American sentiment.
Kathar: I think "extremely unpopular" is perfectly warranted. As far as I've seen, it's perfectly true.
:I can confirm that both as regards Germany and the Republic of Ireland the decription "extremely unpopular" accurately describes the feelings of an apparent majority of people.
:(I currently live in Germany and I have recently lived in Ireland; plus I'm keeping tabs on Irish politics/news/popular opinion.)
:See http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/0624/primetime.html — I can confirm that Ms. Coleman's interview approach probably reflects the feelings of a lot of Irish and resounded well with the Irish public.
::NB: Bush actually practiced censorship in connection with this Interview — quoting from http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/kino/0,1518,306091,00.html :
::"Auch bei US-Präsident Bush verfehlte der Film offenbar seine Wirkung nicht. Vor einem TV-Interview ließ er einer irischen Journalistin jede Frage zu 'Fahrenheit 9/11' untersagen."
::Translation:
::"The film apparently didn't fail to have an effect on US president Bush either. Prior to a TV interview, he ordered an Irish journalist to be forbidden to ask any question about Fahrenheit 9/11."
::(Feel free to incorporate this into the article if you wish; I'm personally at this time weary of opening another can of worms.)
:Maybe however, in the absence of actual poll numbers, its a good idea if we (a) make it clear that Bush junior is "extremely unpopular" with large groups of people, especially outside of the U.S., BUT (b) we do not state that these groups actually constituted the numerical majority. Based on my perception, they VERY likely do, but as long as I don't have proof of that on hand, it's probably better to write that he's extremely unpopular with large groups of people.. Note that the prevalence of anti Bush sentiment might be overrated due to a (hypothetically possible) huge silent crowd of non-US pro-Bush folks and a (rather likely) especially vocal crowd of Bush opponents.
:Ropers 17:52, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Zoney|Zoney]]

message: :*Bush's popularity outside the U.S. tends to be lower, with many reporting a dislike of both his personality and policies, even in nations with close ties to America. Some even view him as the personification of what they dislike about the U.S. - the "Ugly American".
#chocolateboy 06:07, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:VeryVerily|VeryVerily]]

message: :*Bush is very unpopular in most of the world outside of the U.S., even amongst a significant part of the populations of U.S. allies such as the UK, with many holding a dislike of his person and policies. Some view him as the personification of all that people dislike about the US, cf. anti-American sentiment. Kevin Baas 21:28, 2004 Jul 15 (UTC)
#Gzornenplatz 21:53, Jul 15, 2004 (UTC)
#Ilyanep (Talk) 23:58, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:Kevin baas|Kevin baas]]

message: :*I would suggest just "Bush is unpopular outside the US" - but GIVE FIGURES AND REFERENCES. Let the numbers speak for themselves. e.g. (fictional example) "Bush is unpopular outside the US. In the UK, a Spurious Poll asking the question "Bush: Doth he suckest?" got 72% agreement. Across Europe, Spurious polls in France said 110% thought he was a "clown". In Frobnia, however, he had 97% support. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] (refs) - David Gerard 21:51, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:David Gerard|David Gerard]]

message: Has there been sufficient representation to demonstrate that consensus has been reached?
=== Yes. ===
# Kevin Baas | talk 18:19, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC)
# Eh? Do we now need to vote on the vote? 11-4 looks (to me) like a pretty overwhelming consensus (I'm excluding your auto-endoresment, as no-one else did that). chocolateboy 18:49, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Has consensus been reached? 

message: # Kevin Baas | talk 18:19, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC)
# Eh? Do we now need to vote on the vote? 11-4 looks (to me) like a pretty overwhelming consensus (I'm excluding your auto-endoresment, as no-one else did that). chocolateboy 18:49, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes. 

message: Rex071404 07:16, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  No. 

message: but why 2 pictures of Al Gore on the GWB page espically the debate one were Gore is in the front of the pix and Bush is listening to him? That really seems more of Gore pix that Bush happens to be in than a pix of him again small point but perhap a different may be used down the road.
:Next time, please type four tildes to sign your comments. :) WhisperToMe 06:21, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: This might a small point

message: Here's an column by Fareed Zakaria that can be cited perhaps in the section on Bush's standing abroad. It's a bit dated, though.  172 12:13, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Bush's image abroad

message: Neutrality I don't understand your edit to the union of concerned scientists section.
1. it seems to contradict the topic: the union of concerned scientists' grievances
2. the epa is not possesed by the administration.
3. the cited article is about the ommisions in the state of the envronment report, a very significant report and a very significant event.
Kevin Baas | talk 18:28, 2004 Jul 25 (UTC)
::I got that mixed up with another section. Revert as necessary. :) Neutrality 20:49, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Union of Concerned Scientists

message: Although the fact that Bush got nominated for a nobel peace prize is interesting, I don't think it belongs in the public perception section, as it demonstrates the perception of only one person.  Nothing else in the section is about the perception of a single person.  Everything else in the section is about the views of a populace. Kevin Baas | talk 21:27, 2004 Aug 2 (UTC)
:I will take that section out. As you rightly say, one Norwegian is not enough to qualify for "public perception", plus, as was discussed earlier, if this were to stay, it would have to be noted that much more people think Bush should be tried for raging a war of aggression and breaking international law by cluster bombing civilians and denying basic human rights to prisoners of war. Get-back-world-respect 22:18, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The point was discussed earlier on in more detail. Dozens of people are nominated every year, and you did not address any of my points. Get-back-world-respect 22:36, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does a nomination by a single person constitute public perception? 

message: In the section which says "The electoral college outcome could have been altered by a difference of only a few hundred (537/2) popular votes in Florida", would someone please add a mention of the fact that the vote results in Florida were disputed due to confusion over the voting machines - people inadvertently voting for Bush when they had intended to vote for another candidate, and many of the votes being indecipherable due to "hanging chads" - and so therefore there may have been fewer Bush supporters in Florida than the votes themselves showed? - Brian Kendig 04:14, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Florida votes