patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,192,984 comments by 13,872 users - Ceffer, Patrick, UkraineIsTotallyFucked online now
Obama is less competent than George Bush, say a plurality of Americans
invite response
2014 Jun 5, 5:13am 34,122 views 97 comments
« First « Previous Comments 41 - 80 of 97 Next » Last » Search these comments
Homeboy
2014 Jun 6, 5:34pm
. My apologies if you made a simple math error rather than trying to slide something in, I'm so used to the right wingnuts throwing random cherry picked numbers around I am beginning to automatically assume people do it on purpose.
No, definitely not on purpose. I screwed up. Sorry.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 6, 6:21pm
So did the debt under Obama:
According to that chart, the debt to GDP ratio was 55.5% in Q4 2001, which would be the first time Bush would have had any influence over the budget, right? Then in Q4 2009, it was 84.5%. So it increased 29% under Bush. It's currently 102.9%. So it increased 18.4% under Obama.
Bush = loser.
Having a tough time reading a chart again I see... UE went up in the beginning of Bush's term because of a recession and then dropped during his second term..
Um, no. Unlike you, I can read a chart. I said it went up at the beginning and end of Bush's presidency, which it did. What part of that didn't you understand?
So let me see if I understand your argument here. It seems to go something like this: Bush did a better job with the economy than Obama, because there was a recession while Bush was president, so any problems don't count. Is that your argument? LOL.
Hmmm... How many of those 92 Million not in the work force (almost 1/3 of the US population) benefited from that rise in the Stock Market??
Raw numbers with no context and no comparison mean nothing. Try again.
Climbed around 4 Trillion during Bush's 8 years versus climbing 7 Trillion during Obama's 5 years...
Um, nice try, buddy. Bush left office in 2009, not 2008.
2001: 5769 billion
2009: 11,875 billion
Increase: 6106 billion
2009: 11,875 billion
2013: 16,719 billion
Increase: 4844 billion
So Bush's record is worse.
You lose.
Bush sucked. Quit trying to polish that turd. It's not getting any shinier.
Bellingham Bill
2014 Jun 7, 1:09am
Bush and O are just as bad
wat.
Obama has not thrown away trillions on new military misadventures:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/FDEFX
Debt-wise, what happened since 1999 is clear enough:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=CNw
YOY consumer debt increase (blue) artificially juiced the economy, giving us the Bush Boom that brought down deficits 2005-2008.
But it all crashed once home debtors could not longer pay the piper and the $100 BILLION PER MONTH flow directly into the middle quintiles collapsed.
Obama's recovery plan was to replace this with $1T+ of stimulus spending, and that has got us where we are, since after 2010 Congress hasn't done shit about improving the economy.
At this point I'd give Obama a C-, and I don't know what grade I can give Bush; what letter grade can represent a man that destroyed my country through demonstrated incompetent commitment to ideological stupidity?
Being the frontman for neocon adventurism, "Deficits don't matter", defending our existing hydrocarbon energy sector, deregulation and de-policing of the nation's financial system, going after gay people in 2004 (after the MA gay marriage decision made that a hot-button issue for the religious nutjobs that are the dominant faction of the GOP).
Obama's sins are largely that of omission rather than commission.
He's been a spectator since the Dems lost the Senate supermajority in late 2009 and the House altogether in 2010.
A strong president can be more than that, but given the general rightward tilt of the corporatocratic media environment, a President in the minority can push rightwards but not leftwards effectively.
On a caucus basis, conservatives have been much stronger in Congress 2000-now than the GOP/Dem party split appears to show.
Conservatives destroyed this place and now they're stopping the effort to rebuild.
Well played, well played.
Bush and O are just as bad
wat.
Obama has not thrown away trillions on new military misadventures:
He has continued to erode civil rights at an ever accelerating pace. This is much worse. Wars will end eventually. Debt will be repaid or defaulted on. Lost rights will never be recovered. No government in history has ever voluntarily reduced its intrusion into citizens lives.
indigenous
2014 Jun 7, 1:48am
President Obama walked into the Bank of America to cash a check. As he approached the cashier he said, "Good morning Ma'am, could you please cash this check for me?"
Cashier:
"It would be my pleasure sir. Would you please show me your ID?"
Obama:
"Truthfully, I did not bring my ID with me as I didn't think there was any need to. I am Barack Obama, the President of the United States of AMERICA !!!!"
Cashier:
"Yes sir, I know who you are, but with all the regulations and monitoring of the banks because of impostors and forgers and requirements of the Dodd /Frank legislation, etc., I must insist on seeing your ID.
Obama:
"Just ask anyone here at the bank who I am and they will tell you. Everybody knows who I am."
Cashier:
"I am sorry Mr. President but these are the bank rules and I must follow them."
Obama:
"I order you to cash this check!"
Cashier:
"Look Mr. President, here is an example of what we can do. One day, Tiger Woods came into the bank without ID. To prove he was Tiger Woods he pulled out his putter and made a beautiful shot across the bank into a cup. With that shot we knew him to be Tiger Woods and cashed his check.
Another time, Andre Agassi came in without ID. He pulled out his tennis racquet and made a fabulous shot whereas the tennis ball landed in my cup. With that shot we cashed his check.
So, Mr. President, what can you do to prove that it is you, and only you, as the President of the United States ?"
Obama stands there thinking, and thinking, and finally says, "Honestly, I can't think of a single thing. I don't have a clue what to do.
Cashier:
"Will that be large or small bills, Mr. President?
Bellingham Bill
2014 Jun 7, 1:57am
He has continued to erode civil rights at an ever accelerating pace. This is much worse.
Depends on his successors more than he; I am not any less free in 2014 than I was in 2008, though I will concede the powers Obama has not rolled back are easily abusable by future fascists.
But this is a failure of our democracy as a whole and not one man. Should Obama fail to let the Deep State do its thing, they can easily slime him as weak and a danger to the national security, of having caused Americans to get killed.
Again, a failure of omission and not commission. We need a leader to get the people moving in the right direction, and Obama has not been this person.
No government in history has ever voluntarily reduced its intrusion into citizens lives.
There is a serious issue between our elected representatives, the powers that run the parties, the [corporate] press that sets and enforces the Agenda of what we're allowed to talk about nationally.
Like all of us, Obama's just been along for the ride, especially since the GOP took over the House in 2011.
Like when I hear people talk about a given corporation as a single entity (e.g. "Apple should XYZ . . .", it is not particularly intelligent to talk about 'government' as a single entity as in your above.
Of course the snoops are going to snoop and the sp00ks are going to sp00k.
J Edgar didn't run the FBI for decades being a nice guy.
The President is constitutionally directed to run the government as Congress directs. If Congress doesn't like what the Executive is doing, they have the power to change that through changing the law and impeachment if the President (or people below him) flouts the law.
And if we the people don't like Congress, we can work to send better representatives to that body. This is a long, long war though that cannot be won in an afternoon or bullshitting on the internet for that matter.
Um, no it doesn't. This is your link:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx
It's OBAMA's approval rating, not Bush.
Dumb shit
At this point, it gives me no pleasure to correct you, in fact I literally feel sympathy for you, because locating and processing very basic information is beyond you. Hopefully it's just blind rage and not mental impairment.
Yes, the link is an Obama approval rating link, but right below his first four approval rating figures, is the header "historical comparisons" with ratings of all the recent presidents during the this same point in their presidencies. If it was in PDF format, it would be located towards the top of the first page.
Depends on his successors more than he; I am not any less free in 2014 than I was in 2008, though I will concede the powers Obama has not rolled back are easily abusable by future fascists
If you don't think you are less secure then you haven't been paying attention. https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/obamas_first_term_track_record_on_civil_liberties You are the frog in the pot with the temp going up slowly.
But this is a failure of our democracy as a whole and not one man. Should Obama fail to let the Deep State do its thing, they can easily slime him as weak and a danger to the national security, of having caused Americans to get killed.
It's Obama's job to stop the deep state. Period. His own self interest will prevent it, but it is his job.
Like when I hear people talk about a given corporation as a single entity (e.g. "Apple should XYZ . . .", it is not particularly intelligent to talk about 'government' as a single entity as in your above.
Ok, then let's say that no large collection of self interested competing bureaucracies existing at the taxpayers expense has every in history volutarily reduced it's size or relinquished any of it's control of citizens' lives. Is that quibble over now? I notice you didn't name any ones that did.
It's a long war that has never been won. The power of the encumbency to game the system and self delusion of the voters believing in a chicken in every pot is a symbiotic relationship that always has the same end result.
Vicente
2014 Jun 7, 2:42am
The power of the encumbency to game the system
Wrong way around.
Did we ask for the TSA? Hell yes we did! Everyone was so shit-scared of terrorists they welcomed it with open arms. Funding? No problem. Actual utility? We don't need to measure that or even think about it, it makes us FEEL safer. When I was in the aiports just after 9/11 and the National Guard were standing around everywhere with M16 over their shoulders what did people say? How comforting it was!
Now you have a generation that's grown up under it, and can't imagine anything else. Have their parents demanded an end to it? Nope, they sign up for GlobalEntry & PreCheck to minimize the problems. The few who publicly oppose are just nutters like Rand Paul not regular citizens.
Where was the citizen outrage when the Room 641A at AT&T was uncovered, where the NSA had built-in taps? Almost nonexistent! I guarantee you 99.99% of the people who read about it back in 2006 have now forgotten all about it. Only Snowden continuing to rub it in people's faces by SLOWLY dribbling out stuff, keeps the NSA in the news at all. Far more people HATE Snowden, than give him any sort of listen at all. My own spouse, who is from Europe and talks about the evils of the CIA, School of the Americas, etc. and is generally suspicious of the American gov't, left the room when a TED talk about Snowden came on the screen she thinks the guy is a traitor.
You want any of this to unhappen, you need regular people to voice their disapproval of it, not just the conspiracy-obsessed fringe.
Yes there's always some idiot with a suit who says "you've got a problem? I have a program or a system that can help", and it's your job as a citizen to think about whether that will actually help and follow up on it's effectiveness later. WE don't do that is the real problem. I don't care whether it's a contractor selling you on the idea of sharks with laser beams to hunt in the desert, or one selling Nude-o-Scan to stop shoebombers it's the same thing. We don't want to think about it, we want to outsource all our thinking and fighting and so on. Can't get enough volunteers for the military? Let's offer citizenships as a prize so we can turn the Army into a sort of French Foreign Legion.
Caveat emptor.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 7, 6:42am
At this point, it gives me no pleasure to correct you, in fact I literally feel sympathy for you, because locating and processing very basic information is beyond you. Hopefully it's just blind rage and not mental impairment.
Ha ha. You are so funny. Yeah, that's VERY hard to see, since all the headings say "Obama", and it's a long webpage to scroll through, and they stuck the other presidents' names over on the right side.
That was before the Iran-Contra scandal came out, and after Reagan was shot, so people had sympathy for him but didn't yet realize the horrific things his administration was doing.
"Honestly, I can't think of a single thing. I don't have a clue what to do.
Cashier:
"Will that be large or small bills, Mr. President?
Good one !
Homeboy
2014 Jun 7, 6:49am
Boy, Still math challenged again, I see....
You're comparing 8 years of Bush with 4 years of Obama to prove your point... Duh....
Try comparing Obama's to Bush numbers after 4 years... Which I know you won't...
Where will the debt be when you tack on another 4 years of Obama?? Anyone want to take a guess??
So, who's the idiot here again???
Wow. Just wow.
Now I remember why I had you on ignore. You are completely irrational. Makes me think your account is shared by more than one person, or you have multiple personalities.
YOU are the one who posted the chart and compared Bush's ENTIRE presidency to Obama's presidency up to the present. All I did was correct your stupid fucking mistake where you credited one of Bush's years to Obama.
YOU posted the chart; I just corrected your fuzzy math. Now you're trying to turn it around. Nice try, troll.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 7, 6:51am
Are you really that fucked up in the head??
Once again, you're comparing 8 years of Bush to 4 years of Obama...
You are one fucking idiot!!!
Hmmm....repeating the exact same false charge in a separate post. Is this another one of your personalities talking? This personality is kind of a potty mouth.
but didn't yet realize the horrific things his administration was doing.
Its a shame the Contras didnt invade the Capital, taken Sandinista Ortega and tried and hanged him... today Ortega is turning Nicaragua into a dictatorship.
Nicaragua: On the Brink of Dictatorship
February 26, 2014
http://www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2014/02/25/nicaragua-brink-dictatorship
Obama’s Poisonous Fruit: Nicaragua’s Ortega Nullifies Constitutional Law, Paves Way for Dictator for life
Homeboy
2014 Jun 7, 9:55am
Who was the person who posted the original GDP graph and Unemployment graph showing ALL of the Bush years and then Obama years and compared the two??? Is YOUR memory that short???
All I wrote was that GDP went up throughout Obama's tenure. I did not make any numerical calculation of increase comparing 5 years to 8 years.
Do I need to repost YOUR chart as a reminder??? How's that dementia coming along??
Go ahead. Here's a link: http://patrick.net/?p=1243641&c=1090804#comment-1090804
And when you re-read my earlier post, please note that YOU posted a stupid fucking picture saying Obama "was not able to improve the economy and was unable to keep it from getting worse." To which I replied with DATA showing the economy DID in fact get better. You're forgetting that the ONLY issue there was whether Obama was unable to improve the economy, as your stupid little fucking picture claimed.
But let me see if I understand you: It's o.k. for you to claim that Bush was a better president, based on your unfounded assertion that Obama "made the economy worse", but if I disprove your assertion with DATA, then it doesn't count because Obama's term isn't finished yet?
Yeah, that's fair. LOL.
Most people measure the economy through GDP, unemployment, and the stock market. Apparently YOU measure it by what you imagine inside your mind.
It was the other way, asshole... I corrected YOUR fuzzy math where you compared 8 Bush years to 4 Obama years... Remember yet???
Wow, you really are a troll and a liar.
Again, MY post: http://patrick.net/?p=1243641&c=1090804#comment-1090804
Is there a chart of gross debt in that post? No, there is not.
Now, YOUR post:
http://patrick.net/?p=1243641&c=1091063#comment-1091063
Is there a chart of gross debt in your post? Why yes, there is. And what do you SAY about that chart? You say: "Climbed around 4 Trillion during Bush's 8 years versus climbing 7 Trillion during Obama's 5 years..." So you are comparing Bush's 8 years to Obama's 5 years (plus you didn't even pick the right years). Did I do that first, as you claim? How could I possibly? I never posted that chart.
You are a scum-sucking, lying fuckbag troll, who's about a hair's breadth from going on ignore again.
All I did was correct TWO of your stupid fucking mistakes where you compared 8 Bush years to 4 Obama years...
I have noticed something about you. When you lose an argument, you completely flip out and start making up lies. Really low class, dude.
Sure looks like you compared Bush's 8 years to Obama's 5 based on the dates of your graphs below...
GDP - fell at end of Bush's term; went back up throughout Obama's tenure.
Unemployment - Skyrocketed at beginning and end of Bush's term; went down throughout Obama's tenure.
How could I possibly?
It's right there in black and white... Are you really that stupid??
The charts do exactly what he said. GDP dropped and Unemployment skyrocketed the last year bush was in office. They have been going the other way since obama took office. What do you see in black and white that's different from that? You do realize O took office Jan 2009 don't you?
monkframe
2014 Jun 7, 12:15pm
You know, all you gotta read is that Fox News conducted the poll. How the questions are phrased and asked to produce the desired result is also a well-known technique. I'm no fan of the current president, but the previous one? Come on, be real.
indigenous
2014 Jun 7, 1:35pm
I might add that GDP is a joke anyway. But when you consider that O has spent north of 4 trillion to produce those graph numbers it is literally laughable i.e. cooked books.
His graph does not take into account how much of the GDP number is just inflated prices because of increased money supply, or how much was directly from government spending for shit that no one would pay for i.e. common core, cash for clunkers, sky rocketing healthcare costs.
Yet you mutts act as though the numbers were some sort of deity. Have some more kool aid boys.
Obama has not thrown away trillions on new military misadventures:
misadventure ? oh is that what you call being attacked by terrorists...
I guess.. we should do what Clinton did, throw Cruise missiles and hope the Taliban
hand over the terrorist..
Homeboy
2014 Jun 7, 3:01pm
How about in this post of yours:
2001: 5769 billion
2009: 11,875 billionIncrease: 6106 billion
2009: 11,875 billion
2013: 16,719 billionIncrease: 4844 billion
Oh, because you made a comment in a different post, this comment of mine doesn't apply??
Sigh...
I wrote that post AFTER you posted the chart of gross federal debt, and compared Bush's 8 years to Obama's 5 years. I only wrote it to correct you, because YOU USED THE WRONG YEARS.
We already established all this. Stop making up lies, troll.
Are you really that fucked up in the head??
Once again, you're comparing 8 years of Bush to 4 years of Obama...
You are one fucking idiot!!!
Got it!!!
Quoting and responding to yourself? Wow, you really ARE schizo.
My assertion, based on posted graphs and data is that the economic conditions are worse in 5 years of Obama versus 8 years of Bush... while you want to rah rah how great Obama is doing...
I KNOW what your assertion was, and I disproved it using data. Then you bitched that I was allegedly comparing 8 years of Bush to 5 years of Obama.
You DO realize that you can't claim X is worse than Y, then when disproved, claim that X and Y are not comparable, don't you?
YOU claimed Obama "made the economy worse".
I proved he did not.
If you don't think I'm allowed to disprove your statement, don't fucking MAKE the statement, dipshit.
Are you having a tough time grasping that concept or understand math??
Um, no - YOU are the one having difficulty grasping concepts. You didn't originally post any "math"; you posted a stupid picture that said Obama "made the economy worse". I used data to prove it false, then you flipped out and started making up a bunch of lies. And here we are.
So you are comparing Bush's 8 years to Obama's 5 years (plus you didn't even pick the right years). Did I do that first,
Sure looks like you compared Bush's 8 years to Obama's 5 based on the dates of your graphs below...
Now you've resorted to quoting me out of context? You picked that sentence out of the middle of the paragraph I wrote, to mislead into suggesting a different meaning. Wow, you really are a pathetic, weaselly piece of troll shit, aren't you?
As Bob already said, the charts do exactly what I say they do. I made no numerical calculations of total growth based on 2 different time periods. YOU did that, and then I corrected your flawed math.
How could I possibly?
It's right there in black and white... Are you really that stupid??
Another out of context quote. You really are pathetic, you know that?
Seriously, man - stop the fucking lies and misquotes and just admit that you fucked up on the dates. Stop trying to turn it around. You suck at that.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 7, 3:55pm
Then Homie posted debt numbers in post #53 comparing 8 years of Bush to 4 years of Obama to try a lie his way about the national debt...
No, YOU posted debt numbers in post #42. I merely corrected your mistake. Liar. YOU made a claim and I disproved it. What are you having trouble understanding here?
Y
2014 Jun 7, 4:05pm
This is damning evidence....
Fox news "survey."
I'm not impressed.
CNN says essentially the same thing:
The charts do exactly what he said.
No Bob, you're running in slow mode again.... You missed the point completely... Try to catch up...
HomeFried is claiming that he DIDN'T compare Bush's 8 years to Obama's 5 years, but as the dates of his FRED graphs show, they run all of Bush's term and O-boy's current term.. So Homie lied...
That sure looks like a comparison to me..
In the part I posted about homeboy said the numbers went down at the end of bush's term and up since. There's no years involved. A simple description of what actually happened. If it bothers you that much take only the last 5 years of bush's term and the statement is still just as true.
I posted that the debt increase was 6 trillion for bush's entire term and the debt increase is PROJECTED to be 7 trillion under obama for his entire term (since you apparently don't know which years presidential terms start and end). This totally blew your idiotic assertion the the debt as parabolic (apparently another word you don't understand, parabolic means symmetrically up then down but your attempted meaning was clear) under obama. You went back and changed your post rather than being proved wrong.
I can't believe anyone could be so fanatical about defending bush. Or that anyone is so mentally warped by conservative alternative reality that in your odd black is white world anyone pointing out how bad bush was means they are saying obama is good.
I might add that GDP is a joke anyway. But when you consider that O has spent north of 4 trillion to produce those graph numbers it is literally laughable i.e. cooked books.
His graph does not take into account how much of the GDP number is just inflated prices because of increased money supply, or how much was directly from government spending for shit that no one would pay for i.e. common core, cash for clunkers, sky rocketing healthcare costs.
Yet you mutts act as though the numbers were some sort of deity. Have some more kool aid boys.
I'm sorry, exactly how does obama's 4 trillion increased debt, increased money supply, and direct government spending differ from bush's 4 trillion increased debt, increased money supply and direct government spending? Forget it boys, bush is going down in history part 1 for the turd twin act now matter how hard you try to spin it otherwise.
indigenous
2014 Jun 8, 3:38am
I'm talking about QE, although the full measure of O's legislation will not be seen for years, as is the case with LBJ and FDR. I think the numbers are that the avg medicare recipient will receive 7 times what he paid into the system.
This graph shows money supply during both presidencies, clearly higher under O.
This jacks up the GDP but that does not mean anything.
Here is the real GDP that indicates that O has hardly budged GDP for the more than 4 trillion in QE
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/gross-domestic-product-charts
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 6:01am
Here is the real GDP that indicates that O has hardly budged GDP for the more than 4 trillion in QE
Yeah, that sucks that Obama was president during that HUGE plunge in GDP. Oh, wait - that was Bush. LOL.
Looking at your chart - is GDP better after 2009, or worse? Remember, the question was, "Did Obama make the economy worse?"
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 6:03am
You know, Hiroshima really looked like shit after we nuked it. I guess the Japanese just don't know how to take care of their cities.
indigenous
2014 Jun 8, 6:06am
Yeah, that sucks that Obama was president during that HUGE plunge in GDP. Oh, wait - that was Bush. LOL.
No dumbass it is that he has increased QE to more than 4 trillion while making no diff in the GDP.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 7:54am
No dumbass it is that he has increased QE to more than 4 trillion while making no diff in the GDP.
If you can look at that chart you posted and say, "The economy was good when Bush left office, and Obama made it worse", you are completely blind.
indigenous
2014 Jun 8, 7:57am
If you can look at that chart you posted and say, "The economy was good when Bush left office, and Obama made it worse", you are completely blind.
The point is that the economy is NOT good despite 4 trillion in spending.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 8:13am
Give it up with HomeFried.... If they took Obama away in handcuffs, Homie would still be cheering him on....
Bullshit. I don't like what Obama's doing with the economy at all. I'm just amazed you have Bush's dick so far up your ass that you actually think he was doing a better job.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 8:13am
The point is that the economy is NOT good despite 4 trillion in spending.
No, the point is whether Bush was more competent than Obama. Read the thread title for crying out loud.
Sheesh.
indigenous
2014 Jun 8, 11:09am
No, the point is whether Bush was more competent than Obama. Read the thread title for crying out loud.
Just to be clear Obama is less competent than the average girl scout.
indigenous
2014 Jun 8, 12:04pm
Hey, don't pick on the girl scouts... They could run multiple circles around this incompetent "leader" before he would even know what happened...
Good point.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 2:43pm
Just to be clear Obama is less competent than the average girl scout.
Well he's more competent than Bush, so what does that say about Bush?
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 2:45pm
I'm just amazed you have Bush's dick so far up your ass that you actually think he was doing a better job.
Is that what this picture says??
What does the picture have to do with it?
indigenous
2014 Jun 8, 2:48pm
Well he's more competent than Bush, so what does that say about Bush?
based off of some photo shopped picture. I don't know why I'm defending bush he was just another D as far as I'm concerned almost as dumb as you.
Homeboy
2014 Jun 8, 6:29pm
based off of some photo shopped picture. I don't know why I'm defending bush he was just another D as far as I'm concerned almost as dumb as you.
Oh, yeah - your pictures are really authentic. LOL.
So what does George Bush's cock taste like?
« First « Previous Comments 41 - 80 of 97 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://theweek.com/speedreads/index/262706/speedreads-obama-is-less-competent-than-george-bush-say-a-plurality-of-americans
With President Obama's approval rating still deep underwater, a new survey from Fox News finds that Americans generally think George W. Bush ran a more "competent" administration. In the survey, a 48 percent plurality said Bush's White House was more competent, while 42 percent picked Obama's.
At the same time, fully two-thirds of Americans said Bill Clinton's administration was more competent than Obama's, versus only 18 percent who liked Obama's better.
#politics