Alan Keyes?
Rupert Murdoch?
Novakula?
Chuck Norris?
Senator Man-on-Dog?
Senator Macaca?
Mann Coulter?
La Althouse?
Hmm.
That's a tough one to answer offhand.
The first candidate that comes to mind right off the top of my head is Lavrenti Beria. But he's disqualified because he's dead. So's Jeffrey Dahmer.
That's the real problem with so many of the "worse than Bush" possibilities. They've already been preemptively removed from the gene pool because (1) they were completely intolerable assholes, and (2) people found themselves in a position to do something about it.
Inherited wealth and family connections do seem to be a pretty good mitigation of some of life's little risks, don't they?
I was going to say Arnie Schwartzenegger but then I remembered that he actually made a few OK movies.
Hrm...
The homeless guy who sits outside of the OTB at the Ditmars Blvd stop on the N?
Fred Phelps?
A rotting sack of over-ripe pears from last season?
A steaming pile of cat shit?
The posibillities are endless...
I've always had a theory that they ran W in order to burnish George H.W. Bush's administration in comparison. Of course who could the possibly run to make W look good in comparison:
Neil Bush!
Tom Delay?
Billo or Rush?
John Bolton?
Or for the REALLY scary...
Rudy Guliani?
Admit it. They make Jeffrey Dahmer look GOOD - hell, I might run out and out his sticker on my car right now. I mean he just ate people - and only one at a time! A pisher compared to Bush/Cheney!
I'm gonna have to go with Althouse: all those microphones, cameras and all the wine you can drink, well, you get the picture...
Pretty much ANY republican these days...
Mike Huckabee. A religious fanatic as President; worse, one who steadfastly believes (as Reagan never could) in the imminent End of the World. He'd have both the means and the inclination to start that ball rolling.
Clarence Thomas looks as though he's becoming a pineapple........... and just as out of touch as a fellow pineapple, King Louis Philippe.
Don Knots
Shemp
and Barney.
In that order.
........... as to the question, I would imagine Sauron might make a worse president............ although he seems to have been 'on the ball' pretty much all the time, so maybe not.
Oh, forgot Uncle Fester
Giuliani. No contest. He is the worst of Cheney and Bush in one how-the-fuck-did-evolution-bring-us-to-this package. Imagine Bush's bent to cronyism with even less concern for corruption, with Cheney's appetite for dictatorial power turned up to eleven.
Well, the terrifying truth is that all of the current Rethug candidates are shaping up to be worse than Dumbya....as incredible as that sounds. During the Katrina crisis, I wouldn't have thought it possible that anyone could be a worse President than the worthless little shit, but as it turns out, standards can always get worse.
Of course, we can expect the Democrats to save us.
That last sentence was sarcastic, by the way.
What's a pineapple? (in that context)
Cheney or Rumsfeld or Rove or Norquist would all be worse.
Yikes. I didn't think anyone could be worse than W.
As to Huckabee, couldn't we get started the meme that purposely bringing on the End of the World is as much a sin as suicide? No fair helping it along!
So many choices, so little time. And of both parties:
Mike Huckabee
Newt Gingrich
Rudy Guiliani
Steny Hoyer
Rahm Emmanuel
Any member of the Bush or Walker families
Unfortunately, the more difficult question is who would make a really good President? In my experience, anyone I support manages to loose, and loose early.
All of the current Rethug contenders + Hillary Clinton.
Alive and natural born ignorant?
D.Duke
R.Perle
W. Nichols
D. Feurth
N'Frito.
US Blues! 
Also, Chuck Norris...
Actually, Myrte June, US Blues would make a dandy President
Yes, I agree with the "worserest" choices, so yes, I'd say US Blues would be fine Prezi indeed.
Btw, Drifty, you'd make a dandy President yerself 
Malkin.
I gotta go with huckabee, smae disregard for laws or human rights but with a little mroe brains to make thigns happen.
I will argue that bush isn't the worst president ever. He has yet to order the troops to open fire on gatherings of veterans. he still places slightly above hover adn jackson.
I'm not entirely sure that
a) what Bush has done to veterans is materially different from firing on their Anacostia encampment, or
b) such maltreatment of veterans automatically trumps NOLA, Iraq, the utter gutting of government, the destruction of habeas corpus and other constitutional rights, and on and on.
W: HW's revenge. As to who'd be worse, lot of good suggestions here, but sticking to the point I'd go with Rudy.
Actually MISTRESS JEN I believe the homeless dude on Ditmars would make a better Preznit that G'Dub. He looks like he could clean up pretty nicely and he'd probably be a lot more candid about his addictive substance use.
My choice: The Doughy Pantloaf Hizzelf - Jonah Goldberg
Mike Huckabee, Alan Keyes. Alan will never have a chance to be President,unless the RNC goes into recievership and the few people left to vote Republican need a placeholder. Mike Huckabee doesn't know how little he knows and cares less about learning.
How about Caligula's horse. Did a terrible job as a Roman Consul.
prostratedragon: hover imcompitance mirros bushes. adn while he didn't get us involved in a pointless war he did open fire on vets and did every thing he could to keep us out of a confrontation that we needd to have. his actions led t ohitlers boldness as much as chamberlands did.
moonglum,
Hoover was a terrible President but an effective manager of the war food program. An effective administrator at the micro level can certainly be a piss poor decision maker at the macro level, and the Stock Market Crash and the Great Depression was unprecedented in its size and scale. The economy was thought to rise and plunge as it had done for the last century, but it just kept nosing down. Therefore, I would say that Hoover is a much better President overall than Bush (there is no decisionmaking process evident in the Bush White House, subordinates duke it out to see who will effectively control his ear).
Having no president would be vastly superior to Bush, so the decision must be made on someone more able to impose dictatorial impulses on the popular will. The Republicans at this time don't really have such a person, but I could certainly see Romney or Giuliani having the establishment support combined with the base support to launch the police state which Bush laid the foundations for. Both Giuliani and Bush think the leader gets to make the law and anything is acceptable practice in a time of war.
Using fear and hatred to gain more power is a signature of all three of these individuals and this country will not long endure the villainy and treachery of these vain men.
Ha! Gozer, having just taken an exam administered by La Althouse herself, I'm inclined to agree with you!
But that could just be the fresh mental bruises talking.
How about Ken Starr? Anyone get Trent Lott yet? The key is that you have to have a combination of terrible ideals and massive amounts of incompetence. It's a combination that yields spectacularly bad ideas on the macro level (social security privatization?) and terrible administration of even non-controversial, everyday government functions (FEMA). It's actually pretty damn hard to beat W on those fronts.
Charles Manson.
Robert Mugabe. But only slightly.
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
