GWB vs. History

Worst President Ever. You've seen the bumper stickers proclaiming this, which really sound partisan and exaggerated. Yet this is a real issue since his supporters talk frequently about how history will vindicate him (source).

So I went back to take a look at this and see if the people who know (historians) agree. An unscientific survey found 61% (up from 8.3% in 2004) of historians do currently consider Bush the worst president ever. An admittedly poor survey belies the fact that historians don't generally come up with these opinions while a president is still in office, much less alive.

What would make them think that? After all, the US has had some terrible presidents, among them the most corrupt: Grant. For one historian, Bush "ranks with U.S. Grant as the worst. His oil interests and Cheney's corporate Haliburton contracts smack of the same corruption found under Grant."

"While Grant did serve in the army (more than once), Bush went AWOL from the National Guard. That means that Grant is automatically more honest than Bush, since Grant did not send people into places that he himself consciously avoided. . . . Grant did not attempt to invade another country without a declaration of war; Bush thinks that his powers in this respect are unlimited." (Historians vs. George Bush)

Generally considered the worst is Buchanan because of the damage the Civil War did to the US. Buchanan be said to have made the Civil War inevitable or to have made the war last longer by his pusillanimity or, possibly, treason." "Buchanan allowed a war to evolve, but that war addressed a real set of national issues. Mr. Bush started a war . . . for what reason?"

So that's the case against him. While I don't believe in sound bytes, at least one bumper sticker may be accurate.