Well then if you have no problem with the republicans openly stating their goal is to make him a one-term president and doing everything in their power to do so then you should not complain about not having a president as a uniter since the republican party doesn't want the country united.
The republicans were in total control for most of the Bush presidency. Democrats worked together with republicans on a lot of bills. You're not seeing the same from the republicans now. When Reagan was president the democrats worked together with him. Once again you're not seeing this from the republicans now.
So ergo, Bush is a better president than Obama, who when the Dems were in charge could not get his spending bills passed by his on group. I really believe it is a bunch of huey, they should work together and we in the voting public should force them to by only voting for those that will. So who should I vote for?
I too see nothing wrong with the Republicans stating that they want the President to only serve one term. That's the American way.
The Democrats wanted George W. Bush to serve one term but they didn't get their wish. The Republicans wanted Bill Clinton to serve one term, but they didn't get their wish either.
Every President except George Washington had a candidate from an opposing political party running against the incumbent president. The opposition party has always wanted the president to only serve one term. Since Washington, we have never had another president who ran without opposition.
The Democratic Party will be stating its goals when it lays out the party's platform at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina during the first week of Septmeber. However I'm surprised that Richard Edwards seems to not be aware of the fact that Barack Obama has been out on the campaign trail for months now, stating his goals for a possible second term. He makes a speech about his goals in a different city nearly every single day.
The Republican Party will be stating its goals when it lays out the party's platform at the Republican National Convention in Tampa Bay, Florida during the last week of August. Mitt Romney also has been out on the campaign trail, stating his goals for the next four years if the voters should select him as the next president.
Anyone can simply go to the campaign web sites of either candidate and read their goals for January, 2013 through January, 2017 for themselves.
Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have enough support to elect a President. It will be the independent voters who decide the next president.
President Bush may have been a better president in Richard Edwards' mind but if he was so great, John McCain and Sarah Palin would have been elected to continue the Bush legacy. That didn't happen. After Bush, a majority of American voters (53%) wanted a change.
The only thing is shows is one party is willing to work with the other when in power while the other party isn't. It doesn't make bush a better president. He also had the country falling behind him because of 9/11. I have a feeling if another event such as that happened the republicans wouldn't put the country first with a democrat in charge.
"Every President except George Washington had a candidate from an opposing political party running against the incumbent president."
Actually, in 1820 President James Monroe ran effectively unopposed to earn his second term in office. Also, in 1824, all four major candidates belonged to the same party (the Democratic-Republican Party), though that party split into two very shortly thereafter (Jackson becoming a Democratic, and Quincy Adams becoming a National Republican), and, obviously, none of them were incumbents.
In 1820 one New Hampshire Elector DID vote for John Quincy Adams against James Monroe! Without naming a candidate, the Federalists DID manage to get 16% of the vote against Monroe and Independent candidate De Witt Clinton got another 1.75%. Rather than NO opposition, Monroe had disorganized opposition and weak opposition.
Except the answer would be the same. We started divided, and the Republicans have actively fought every effort the President has made to fix the economy and make things better. They've lied about his record.