Will Bush Bashing help?

Great Debates
1

Saw this article on CNN and thought it would make an interesting (in the Chinese sense of the word) debate. Here is a link to the article. In brief, the article posits that President Obama and the Dems seem to be focusing more and more on former President Bush in trying to focus peoples attention on the up coming elections…a compare and contrast view. And, again, according to the article, they are doing this because in the polls, when you use Bush’s name, it’s nearly a magic talisman…for the Dems. When you don’t use it, then the polls are more evenly balanced.

So, for debate, will this tactic work for the Dems (assuming you believe that this is what they are in fact doing)? Or will it backfire?

-XT

2

It seems likely to work better than extolling their near-nonexistent achievements. Bush is still quite vivid in people’s minds. And it’s not like the Republicans have reinvented themselves in the meantime, so “do you want more of what Bush did?” is an effective argument.

3

Apparently, 65% of Americans think that a Republican Congress will promote a 'new economic agenda that is different from George W. Bush’s policies.

Seems wise to attempt to disabuse people of that notion.

4

I was going to say it’s probably past its sell-by date, at least as an issue that would affect anybody’s vote. The poll is making me rethink that opinion somewhat.

5

Yeah, that was my initial thought as well when I first started reading the article.

-XT

6

It is not Bush bashing to point out that he took a well running economy. low unemployment, low national deficit, and no wars and fucked it all up on purpose. The battles Obama has been fighting is due to his efforts to fix the mess Bush created. That is why it is not Bush bashing to point on the mess we have been trying to fix is his mess.

7

I think Bush’s screw ups will be felt for many more years to come. We probably need at least 4 presidents for the full 2 terms each (32 years) before we get back to where we were before Bush was “elected.”

As a side note, I was one of the original ABB’ers (Anyone But Bush) before he was “elected” in 1999. I’m glad to see we finally won.

8

Now I know it’s CNN and so forth, but how could that Quinnipiac poll, showing fault at 53 Bush to 25 Obama be so at odds with the Rassmussen poll which shows it a dead heat (actually, 48-47 Obama)?

More details here.

Interesting, among independents it’s 52-44, Obama at fault. More details from that poll:

9

Of course it’s necessary to remind voters about whose policies got us into this mess. What do you mean, OP?

Smashy, you need to do some homework about the long-term, widespread pattern of partisan bias in Rasmussen polls, okay?

10

Der Trihs, I often enjoy your insights in other postings, but this one surprises me. Dems have only arguably controlled things for a year and a half, and were forced to put most of their effort into averting another Great Depression and dealing with two wars and recently-squandered international standing, all with a damaged government; yet they’ve already reworked health care and financial regulation. And this, without actual veto-proof Senate numbers (to call theirs a veto-proof majority requires including independent Lieberman, who seemed to be in the pocket of Connecticut insurance companies).

If the drunken toboggan ride down the mountain took all 8 hours of the night, why criticize when climbing back up the mountain next morning with a hangover isn’t finished in an hour and a half?

11

The problem, of course, is that the Republicans want to engage in revisionist history: they want the public to blame Obama (and, by extension, the Democrats) for every negative we’re experiencing. Given that, I don’t think it’s a bad idea to remind the public that it was, in fact, Republicans and the President they elected previously who got us into this mess.

Voters have a very short memory, and Republicans like to take advantage of this fact.

12

Their health care and financial “reform” are barely better than a joke, full of handouts to the Republicans and exceptions for companies with leverage. Yes, they are better than the Republicans but only because the Republicans are such incompetent bigoted lunatics.

13

Just wanted to say this is a very nice line. Consider it stolen :slight_smile:

14

This. Bush was a fuck up, his cabinet was a bunch of fuck ups and parasites, and his (or his parasite’s) policies set us back a lot. We have two wars, a busted economy, fewer rights to privacy, less expectations of a speedy (or any) trial (GITMO and the war on terror), etc etc.

So, using Bush as the poster boy for the problems his buddies and his incompetence caused, seems like a sure bet.

Besides, “you guys” still try to blame things on Clinton, after all these years. Tit for tat. Bush was your boy. After 8 years of “accept it or get out” after 8 years of “support Bush or get out”, why the sudden wish to disassociate from your former Fearless Leader?

15

LOL, yeah if you can’t win the argument, shoot the messenger :rolleyes:

The rantings of lefty orgs like MediaMatters notwithstanding, I think you need to edumacate thyself. Even a god to the left like Nate Silver at 538 says

Since they tend to use likely voters instead of registered voters, it may be using a different model than the other poll.

16

Go ahead and “shoot messengers” MediaMatters, TPM, ThinkProgress or any others that, unlike Rasmussen and Fox, don’t tell you what you need to believe if you must. Gawd. Here’s how John Marshall puts it:

And Nate Silver himself, since you were able to be fed something cherry-picked out of context that you do like:

.

We deal in facts here, not desires.

17

All that peace, prosperity, and budget surpluses still grate on them.

18

The Labour government that ruled from 1997-2010 in the UK managed to get a lot of mileage out of invoking the previous Conservative government that ruled from 1979-1997 and in particular by invoking the divisive figure of Margaret Thatcher who was Prime Minister from 1979-1990.

19

I’ve not read the entire thread, but I will offer my perspective (as a long-time registered Independent, progressive/liberal voter who often votes 3rd party but voted for Obama, in the interest of full disclosure)

“Bush Bashing” helps. Absolutely. The way in which the previous administration is being “bashed” currently is less about angry, bitter, vindictive partisan politics and more about making very valid, relevant points re’ the clear differences between Republican policies and Democratic ones.

It is perfectly valid and relevant for Obama to point out what he inherited, why, in his opinion, these crises came about, and the differences between his approach and those who preceded and currently seek to supplant him.

We find ourselves in a situation in which almost a decade of Republican policies have resulted in:

  1. the worst depression since the Great Depression

  2. Two wars being fought indefinately, one on questionable pretenses

  3. near total collapse of our major financial institutions and remaining major industries, neccesitating a taxpayer funded bail-out (Bush’s baby, FTR…at least the Dems insisted on clauses requiring oversight and repayment and recently passed a law preventing future bail-outs of companies brought down by their own incompetence/corruption)

  4. record debt, both public and private

  5. the BP fiasco, which brought to light the long-standing lack of government oversight and regulation of corporate operations fostered under Republican control.

The Republicans, for the most part, are proposing more of the same; after having had 8 years to prevent or fix the current mess, which was caused, largely, by the same policies/approach they now present as their platform heading forward. :rolleyes::dubious:

It is not about distraction of deflection or refusal to take responsibility (this administration and president has admitted mistakes and accepted full responsibility to a far greater degree than the Bush administration of Bush ever did…as in, EVER!:p)

It is about engaging the American people in an honest dialogue about how there is a lag between actions and their consequences, what those actions were and what the consequences have turned out to be, the logic/sanity of doing the same actions over again and expecting different results and how and why different actions stand a much better chance of resulting in much better outcomes.

As a student of history and esp. political history, it is clear to me that we are essentially repeating the last period following an extended Republican rule…

the “roaring 20s” with their deregulation, speculation, excess, corruption, shifting of the tax burden from the rich and big business to the working poor and middle class…

followed by economic collapse, depression, and the rise of the Democrats who came in and “re-distributed” the wealth (which the Republicans had previously “re-distributed” to their cronies), introduced groundbreaking social and financial/business reforms and programs, and got America working and the economy moving again.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it (as I believe we are and have repeatedly…again I recommend reading Kevin Phillips, esp. his excellent book, “The Politics of Rich and Poor”, for both a broad-reaching and detailed understanding of American history and politics).

Americans tend to have both a short attention span and strong ideological/political viewpoints, (and, esp. recently, to be fairly evenly divided along those lines) which combine to keep us trapped in this back and forth shifting from diametrically opposed approaches and blaming current administrations and policies for results which are actually due to what the previous administration did.

We often fail to see the larger picture and focus on what is happening NOW, to ME, and demand instant gratification (might have something to do with being such a rel. young nation:confused:)

I guess Obama IS an “intellectual elitist” for attempting to raise the national debate to a more complex, long-term level and make a case for his ideas for change with more than sound-bites. :rolleyes:

At any rate, I personally was as strongly opposed to Bush and the policies of his administration as anyone, and I could care less about “bashing” him or them for the sake of bashing. We voted the fuckers out, finally. What I do care very much about is us NOT voting the fuckers back in. :smack:

If pointing out the whys and hows and using them as an example to advocate for a better approach will help in that cause, I am all for it. :cool:

20

This infinity. :smiley:

The teabaggers (and I only recently became aware that they hated that term; I’ve used it from the get-go because their 1st big event was sending teabags to Washington and heard some describe THEMSELVES as such…they are just pissed because they had no idea it is a sexual term… I wasn’t either, but I DO read Dan Savage and discovered it was! When I use it now, the “insult” is intentional :p) just suddenly came out of the woodwork, all terribly concerned with big government, spending/the national debt, government corruption and secrecy/lack of transparency, etc…
Where the fuck WERE these people for 8 YEARS? :confused:
Most of them, ime, were driving around with “I support our president” bumper stickers, calling any who questioned Bush a “traitor” and voting Republican. They just LOST and their party/president was so discredited they decided to call themselves “Independents” as they agitated for Republican policies.:dubious: