President Obama and President Bush are 2 very different people - both in personality and in policies. The actual applications of their policies may or may not be hugely different, but they are ideologically very different. Ultimately, the President's personal views often take a back seat to the wills of the legislature.
It's quite funny that President Obama campaigned on the platform of Hope & Change, and when he got into office he succeeded in breaking all of his promises and continuing the unconstitutional practices of his predecessor. The strangest thing about it is how the GOP and the public are now up in arms about Obama doing the exact same things Bush did - let's not draw a line between political parties, let's stamp out corruption entirely.
Obama isn't the same as George W. Bush by any means. They're both relatively unpopular presidents, but they're unpopular for different reasons. Plus, one is a Democrat and the other is a Republican. These two figures are much more different than they are similar, and most people would agree on that point.
President Obama is different from George W. Bush. He has his own policies and agenda and able to do things differently for this country. I think that so far he has done a great job trying to lead this country and to be able to keep us safe and finally doing some policies that matter.
President Obama is in the unenviable position of having to clean up the financial messes made by Former President Bush and his compatriots. He faces more constant partisan opposition and is afforded much less respect than Bush when he was in office. President Obama is trying to work with other countries, while Bush had a knack for offending others on an international scale.
I think anyone asking this needs to remember how bad things were (relatively) when Bush was President. Outside of the initial two years of vitriol from birthers and the like Obama isn't catching nearly the amount of flack Bush did throughout every step of his entire presidential career. It's even more surprising when you consider bush had handlers like Karl Rove to keep him from looking like a dolt and he still goofed up in public somehow pretty much daily.
I'm a fairly liberal guy but live in a very conservative area, so while it's anecdotal evidence, it at least means a lot for me. We also have two large bits of policy Obama has pushed through (or at least had a hand in): healthcare and marijuana reform. By simply saying he didn't want the DEA to go after legal dispensaries, there was an implicit nod to the US that things would be getting better on that front. The healthcare thing I'm no so qualified to speak on, save to say it is obviously a huge deal and will manifest itself as time goes on.
So no, Obama is nothing like Bush, in my opinion.
President Obama is most definitely different than George W. Bush. I would not even begin to compare the two. They are different in many ways. For starters their personalities are far apart and that is possible the beginning reasons for their differences in political issues as well, which are also far apart.
Obama and Bush are similar in some ways, like continuing (for a time) the war on terror, and for wanting to see the nation kept safe from terror via the Patriot act.
However, Obama expands this by signing the NDAA, and he believes more in govt. control than Bush (higher taxes, more regulation, etc.), while Bush believed that people could make their own lives without govt. help.
Tell me a difference in policy? Not ideology.
You might say "well Obama did end the war in Iraq." Actually Bush signed a Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government to withdrawal troops by the end of 2011. Obama just followed it.
You might say "Bush wants to end abortion, Obama is pro-choice." That might be an ideological difference. But did it result in policy changes? No. Abortions still took place while Bush was in office and planned parenthood still got funding.
You might say "Obama has a liberal economic policy while Bush was conservative." Not true. In 2010 Obama signed a tax bill that was almost identical to the highly refuted Bush tax cuts. Also, the raise in the minimum wage was voted on and signed into law by Bush, not Obama.
My point is that misconceptions on these two figures are often as blurry as the lines Robin Thicke sings about. When it comes to policy they might as well be brothers from another mother. News outlets on both sides distort the debate into making it us vs. Them. In order to divide the votes and conquer the political direction of this country. Basically we have a choice between Pepsi and Coke. They might seem totally different. But deep down they're both just nasty carbonated water with dye and high fructose corn syrup added in. Choice has become a delusion.
Many in the media get lazy and resort to narratives to tell stories. When things don't fit that narrative they are ignored or spun in a way that fits the preconceived story. So Obama being a hope and change/socialist liberal while Bush was a compassionate conservative/right wing nut job is easier to sell than two guys presenting many of the same ideas in different ways.
If you ignore the stylistic differences and actually look purely at their positions and the results of those positions it's uncanny how similar they are. Both presidents tried to end the economic recession with a combination of economic stimulus, corporate welfare, and massive tax breaks (sacrificing fiscal responsibility in the process) both fought wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (Iraq war ended at a time predetermined by the Bush administration ), both Presidents gave the NSA virtually unlimited power to spy on everyone in the world, both used drone strikes to kill people suspected of terrorism in foreign nations we are not technically at war with, both kept Guantanamo open, one passed a healthcare reform bill that was a huge gift to the pharmaceutical industry while the other passed a healthcare reform bill that was a huge gift to the insurance industry.
Really the only issues where they are huge differences between the two are gay marriage and marijuana legalization and Obama only recently changed positions on those issues because public opinion has shifted.
During his first presidential campaign, Barack Obama made a piñata of George W Bush. He criticised Dubya on all fronts, including his forerunner’s foreign policy, which seemed to be built on a philosophical foundation culled from Sergio Leone spaghetti westerns.
Now, after failing to close Gitmo and continuing to drone the shit of people, Obama is mulling over intervening in Syria. The parliament of his closest allies yesterday decided this wasn't a good idea and the UN investigators are yet to issue their findings regarding the use of chemical weapons that sparked this whole thing off.
In any event, Obama continues to mull, contemplating pulling a Dubya and staging an "intervention" on a whim rather than on the basis of any real evidence.
Bush followed the order of the day. He sold us a bill of goods. He made us believe we would be nothing without him as president.So does Obama. Both love war. Both love spending money... Both love power.They both believe the govt should have ultimate control over its citizens. We live in a country without laws,without the wisdom of our forefathers because Obama and bush are elitist blood brothers content w world domination .
Unfortunately, George W. Bush did not ever come across as very intelligent, nor did it seem that his decisions came from him but rather from surrounding people who controlled him. He seemed like a likable guy, but never did seem like a leader. It was difficult to have respect for him apart from the fact that he was a figurative leader. Although Obama has had difficulty getting things accomplished, I do listen to his speeches as if they matter, and as if they are coming from a man who knows who he is. So with Obama, it seems as if what he says is significant to me, and it seems as if he is respected in foreign affairs as a man who is direct. George W. Bush just seemed like a pawn to big business and not to have enough backbone to have his own views.