It has potential. It serves a couple of purposes for the Democrats. First, it offers a defense against any Republican claims that the Democrats haven’t accomplished anything - the Democrats will counterclaim that they’re still getting out of the hole Bush left the county in. Second, if the Republicans try to turn the election into a referendum on “Obama: Yes or No?” the Democrats will try to redirect it as “Obama vs Bush: Who’s Better?” - basically arguing that the Democrats may not be perfect but they’re better than the Republican alternative.
It’s not a great strategy but I don’t see it backfiring in a major way. The only way the Republicans can directly refute it is to denounce Bush and claim that the Democrats now represent the Bush legacy - and I don’t think that’s going to happen. Or if Bush dies and people get sentimental about him - but that’s unlikely to happen before the election. So getting bashed on Bush is going to be an obstacle the Republicans will have to overcome.
I’m pretty much just going to let this one run it’s course with minimal input for me…after all, I’m interested in what others thing on the subject, not my own views on it.
However, since I was asked a question:
I mean exactly what I said in the OP, namely:
I’m asking whether the tactic will work, or whether it will backfire, and why you (and the others) think it will or won’t. It seems clear enough to me. It could go either way…either people will be reminded of Bush and see the contrast to what we have now in either a favorable or unfavorable light, or it will backfire and people will think that the Dems and/or Obama is simply trying to divert attention from the current woes by trying to focus on the previous administration. The consensus in this thread seems to be that focusing on the contrast is a good thing, and that the tactic (whether good or bad) will pay off for the Dems. That’s fine with me…that’s why I asked the question, to get a feel for what 'dopers (at least those who responded to the thread) THINK will happen.
Health care is not a policy that will shine with quick and obvious results. It will take money to implement. It was a gutty decision to pursue it. If we leave it alone ,it will be a huge help to a country that desperately needs it.
The impact of the Bush policies was enormous and as I said before was deliberate. He was emptying the treasury to make it possible to cut the untouchable programs. Now the Rebublicants are asking to cut medicare, social security and every other program that does not make the rich better off. Nordquist said they were going to do it and they did. Will it fit down the toilet yet?
Personally, I think that we, as a country, really are still mired in the effects of the Bush 43 years. So, bringing that up is totally valid and doesn’t really qualify as “Bush bashing”. But again, I think that the Bush administration AND all the Republicans that (seemingly) unquestioningly supported it were so phenomenally terrible that constant reminders of that are good for the country.
More interesting to me is the question of how Republicans respond. It seems that “My Man Mitch” Daniels is taking the tack of embracing the Bush years:
Of course, the Bush administration actually left the Obama administration with a $1.2 trillion deficit, but never you mind, FOXNews viewe…ahem…American voters. Sure, mistakes were made, but that was then and this is now! We, the Republicans, are the responsible ones…now that we’re not running things! Look at the monkey!