Kasz216 said:
outlawauron said:
Rath said:
1). The BBC at least has a very neutral tone in its news articles, it just reports news.
2). Comparing somebodies positive facetime to Bush is foolish as Bush is already considered to be a fairly poor president.
http://www.c-span.org/PresidentialSurvey/Overall-Ranking.aspx
Thats the latest poll of historians. He doesn't exactly have a great rating there.
3). Obama is more popular with Americans than G.W.Bush. Therefore perhaps he gets more positive stories because he is actually (in the eyes of the majority of Americans) a better president than G.W.Bush. |
Well, that list is complete bull. What did George Washington do, since 2000, to go up a place?
And President Bush had great ratings at the start of his presidency as well.
|
Change in how his and other presidencies are seen historically... and slight change in historian/poltician. In general it takes a good 10-15 years before you settle at about the same place.
The Sienna polls are the best ones though.
|
That said, then why did George Washington pass Franklin Roosevelt. Both presidents whom served their terms many decades ago and well outside your 10-15 window. I'm jus saying that I think the polls are little silly. Must polls are I believe.
