this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
402 points (97.9% liked)

politics

18930 readers
4731 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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
 

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 131 points 4 days ago (5 children)

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 43 points 4 days ago (1 children)

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 22 points 4 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 4 points 4 days ago

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

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] ochi_chernye@startrek.website 3 points 4 days ago

I think you're right, but I'd like to believe there was at least one person out there that thought, "Shit, I'd better vote for Harris, or he might shoot me in the face!"

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 54 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

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 4 days 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 4 days ago (1 children)

Second worst president ever.

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

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 31 points 4 days ago (2 children)

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 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

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 4 days 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 35 points 4 days ago (13 children)

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

[–] TammyTobacco@lemmy.ml 18 points 4 days ago (1 children)

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 10 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days 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

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 30 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days 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.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 19 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days 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.

[–] WhyFlip@lemmy.world 20 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Choose a side you fucking coward, Bush.

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 27 points 4 days ago

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

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days 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.

[–] btaf45@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

His nephew is still in politics and he thinks speaking out will hurt his nephew's political career.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Its Bush, that war criminal can go to hell

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

straight to hell

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

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

To Bush, being morally indefensible is a plus.

[–] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days 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.

[–] Bluefalcon@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 4 days ago

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

[–] Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

Honestly find it odd that he hasn't come out for Harris considering he's the first one to look at President Trump and say "this is weird shit". It's not like Bush is in politics anymore I don't see how ditching Trump would hurt him in any way

[–] steve_floof@lemm.ee 3 points 4 days ago

My moral barometer, George W. Bush

load more comments
view more: next ›