During Bush's 1st tem in office many americans felt that he was not fit 4 the job, why then was he re-elected?
108834
First, Bush was elected in both terms under the rules of the Consitution whether people agree with it or not.\nTo get to your question now. How did he get elected to start with if Americans didn't feel he was fit for the job. It wouldn't have happened. Many Americans didn't feel Clinton was fit for the job, yet he was elected twice.\n9/11 changed things for many people. Bush took a stand to defend this country. That resonated with many people.\nThe other part is that the Democratic party has taken a trend further to the left of the political spectrum. That doesn't resonate with the majority of Americans. They also haven't really put up any plans except to say that Bush and the Republicans are wrong. If you don't give people an option, how can you expect to win them over. People respond to positives, not negatives.\nIf the Democrats are going to start winning more elections it's going to have to be by finding people who are more to the center and aren't just pretending to be more centrist contrary to their voting record.
901354
One would hope the only reason a person would seek the job as president would be because they feel a difference could be made through their service. No, I'm not man enough for the job... but then again too few of the presidents we have elected have been either.
842824
I think that Bush cost us (republicans) the election. I think that people were voting against bush rather than for a canidate. THAT worries me. I am one of those people that, even though I am a republican at heart, I feel regardless of party affiliation, it should be whoever's best for the job. And I don't necessarily know if those voted WERE best. I just hope those elected PROVE to the country that the voters didn't make a mistake.
971147
Because is is a bad leader who's damaging the planet and losing respect from all other countries. Because most Americans have woken up and realised he is an imbecile and not fit to lead a country.\nAnyway, Bush didn't lose an election, two more years till that happens. It's only the rest of his party that lost.
144926
UGH BUSH! DO YOU EVEN HAVE TO ASK? GOD, I CANT STAND HIM! HOW DID HE GET ELECTED AGAIN!??
785397
First, he didn't fire him, he resigned.\n\nWhy didn't that happen before the elections...  My guess would be the White House didn't want his resignation to effect the election.  Not that it did them a whole lot of good anyway.
600579
earliest version of politics. the majority would turn against him so he let them make the choice even though it was wrong.\n\nblair/bush telling us just what we want to hear is so they do lose the vote of the majority...majority rules
484422
He became president only because he is a master of elections he knows how to win elections, may be by hook or crook. just like his father. But truly speaking why would somebody deliberatly not do any work for the country, all presidents are same and bush is no exception.
541173
I think maybe it was some kind of "you don't change horses in the middle of the stream" mentality...kind of like why we kept re-electing FDR during WWII. It's too bad Katrina didn't hit in 2004 so everyone could see what a bunch of incompetent ninnies his administration was made up of BEFORE the election.
670100
There is some doubt in my mind if he was every fairly elected. The first election he was appointed and the second had several states that had discrepancy's. I just hope that in November that we can get a fair election. I can't believe that many people was so stupid that they ever voted for him in the first place, and the ones that still back him have no real reason as to why.
174905
Here are the reasons why Bush should not have been reelected.\n\nGeorge W. Bush had been a busy boy during the years 2000-2004. Because his Administration's policies are so radical and his attempts to change our country so far-reaching, it is sometimes difficult to remember them all. Here's a summary of why Bush and his gang of bloodthirsty corporate goons must go; voters may take them along to the polls to help them cast their ballots.\n\n1. He stole the 2000 election. Voting to "reelect" an illegitimate commander-in-chief who seized power by judicial coup d'état is a tacit endorsement of how he got into the White House in the first place. How the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Bush v. Gore is irrelevant. As a federal court, the five runaway Supreme Court justices had no right to agree to hear the case. Under our system of government, elections--and election disputes--fall under state jurisdiction. Their decision to take the case, the way they fixed the outcome in Bush's favor, and Bush's willingness to assume the presidency extraconstitutionally are outrages that no patriotic American, even if they agree with his policies, can forgive.\n\n2. He politicized 9/11. During the early days after the attacks on New York and Washington, a stunned nation came together to mourn, and to assess the motivations of the 19 men who despised us so much they were willing to commit suicide as mass murderers to drive home the point. Rather than channel our newfound solidarity into positive initiatives, however, Bush used 9/11 to push for the USA Patriot Act, fast-track signing authority on free trade, tax cuts for the wealthy, lax regulations for polluters and a multitude of items from the partisan Republican Party wish list. He portrayed Democrats and others who disagreed with him as un-American traitors.\n\n3. He let the terrorists get away while giving them a payraise. The 9/11 hijackers were Egyptians and Saudis recruited by an Egyptian group, Islamic Jihad, with funding from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, some of whom received training at camps which were mostly in Pakistan, all of which were funded by Pakistani secret intelligence. Osama bin Laden, who may have funded all or part of the operation via Al Qaeda, was in Pakistan on 9/11. So who does Bush go after? Afghanistan, at best a back lot of Pakistani-backed Islamists and Iraq--which had nothing to do with 9/11. And what does he do about our real enemies in Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia? He sells them more weapons. Egypt becomes the second largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid after Israel, collecting over $2 billion annually. Pakistan, ruled by a pro-Taliban general who jailed and tortured his democratically elected predecessor, is encouraged to develop its nascent nuclear capabilities. The 3,000 victims of 9/11 remain unavenged--and the stage is set for future attacks.\n\n4. He murdered nearly 100,000 people. The war in Afghanistan killed at least 10,000 civilians and 20,000 Afghan soldiers (of which 10,000 were POWs allegedly massacred by Northern Alliance soldiers as U.S. Special Forces troops supervised the slaughter.) As of three weeks after the fall of Baghdad, General Tommy Franks estimated Iraqi dead at 30,000 civilians and 30,000 Iraqi soldiers, men who were fighting to defend their country from a hostile invasion army. At least 10,000 more civilians and 5,000 Iraqi resistance soldiers have died since then. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq have anything to do with the war on terrorism, which has yet to start. Both wars were waged to expand American military and economic hegemony and Dick Cheney's policy of "total energy dominance" over oil and natural gas resources. The world would be safer if Charles Manson, a mere amateur killer by comparison, were released and Bush was sitting in prison.\n\n5. He bankrupted the treasury. When Bush took the oath of office in January 2001, the U.S. Congressional Budget Office projected a surplus of $5 tr
411612
He was appointed to the first term in a questionable election, and flat stole the second election. I think at least of the people of America, the democrats, are dumb for letting him get away with it and the other half for not carring how they got him elected, with the bottom line he is president are also dumb for supporting him. Oh yeah. Those are the ripuglicans.
69121
I really didn't want another Bush in office because of Sr George Bush was about when he was in office. Unfortunately his son is in office and then 9/11 happened. Now we have our troops over seas fighting against an enemy that they have no real experience in fighting (guriella war-fare). Troops are dying everyday and we really haven't found any weapons   of mass destruction or Osoma Bin-Laden as of yet. The real reason why we are over in Iraq is to get our bid in on their black gold. Is Bush the right person for presidency? NO. But he has to finish what he started.
1014063
Well, we didn't really vote for him the first time, and I think it has something to do with Americans being blind to our political process.  ...and denial.
694495
There as many reasons as there are incumbents who lose. Your reason is 1 of them. Sometimes, voters feel like he has done a poor job, ex Ford & Carter. Sometimes people like the other candidate, other times people want t change of direction.
744171
doesn't matter what we'd do IF... there's a thousand what would you do if's that you could think about in your mind. the point is, we're NOT in charge, and we didn't make those decisions. and if Bush made the wrong one's, he has to take the blame for that, not have his decisions lessened in their weight by trying to wonder what we would have done. he was elected to do a job, he was trusted to do a job. when he fails, he has to take the wrap. it's not for me to wonder what i would have done because it wasn't be who botched the job. it was him.
677859
Because Americans will not stand up and band together and speak their minds. Those that do, cannot generate enough support because people have no back bone. Do you think for one second that if you were a Pres. say of a company, and your ratings were 30% or less that you would still be Pres.? NO. There should be no differences. Arm yourself with knowledge and VOTE!! Just a note.. 1 in 3 Republicans do not want BUSH in office at this point of his Presidency. What does that tell you??