Why are all the Democratic candidates running on platforms as if they were running against GEORGE W. BUSH?

Question

When you listen to just about any of the democratic candidates, you will almost certainly hear something like this: "....the failure of the current admininstration", "........the failure of the Bush administration" and similar lines. Don't they realize that the candidate they will be up against after the conventions won't be GEORGE W. BUSH?

wise guy (?) IF that's their point, then they should so state it.

Shouldn't they be ranting and raving against the "favored" Republican candidate so to help their own chances in the future? Maybe they could even knock the favored one out of the race.

dinodino, aren't you watching the debates? There was one today. You don't hear much because of the media preference for democratic demogoguery.

celticex, Reagan you must know is the
"standard bearer" for the republican party much as Lincoln was prior.
Bush has an abysmal record? Current events and public opinion aside, history will be a better judge of this President.

bush invented the google - I like your picture. Can you send me an autographed full size to hang on my wall?

All right. They want to stick the current contenders for the crown with his reputation (be it due or not). To say that all republican candidates seek to remain status quo is assinine in it's own merit. Progress is the name of the game in Washington. As long as the populace is split 50-50, the congress stays 50-50 and the situation will always be "status quo".

Think I figured out how to strike a nerve on YA, ask a question about Democrats!

Just my opinion but I'm sticking to it, ya'all have the wrong opinion of George W. Bush if you thinks he's been the worst president in the modern era.

Answer 1

Well we never hear that from the republican candidates so one must assume they approve of and will continue the policies of the last republican administration (excluding Paul and Hunter)

EDIT: Yeah I watched the debates today, that's exactly what my comments were based on...

Answer 2

Bush is a huge part of the recent republican record. in 2000 republicans essentially ran against Clinton... you run a platform on what has been done not what someone, who you don't even know who it might be, might do. you are misunderstanding what platforms are. they are almost always current situation vs what the candidate would do different or the same. all the republicans in 2000 ran on moral leadership and restoring dignity to the Whitehouse... this wasn't Gore's supposed weak point.

Ron Paul is basically running against Bush as well.

Answer 3

The Republican candidates follow the same ideology as Bush for the most part, so unless they nominate a candidate with a different agenda, we can expect more of the same from them. That makes the current administration's failures relevant to the campaign.

The Republican candidates trying to pretend the last seven years never happened aren't giving me a warm fuzzy feeling that they'll be any improvement. I'll be more inclined to vote for whoever makes the most sincere promise to fix the current mess.

Answer 4

George W. Bush is one of the most unpopular presidents in our modern history, so by bashing him, politicians score points.

It should be noted that the Republican candidates also take great care to distance themselves from the Bush administration as well, generally bringing up the name of "Reagan" quite frequently, but rarely, (if ever) likening themselves to the current administration.

In terms of strategy, the Democrats are notorious for running terrible campaigns. This is the party that continues to hire Bob Shrum after all, a man famous for running cowardly, and ineffective campaigns that cost the Democrats several elections. So it is safe to say, the Democrats generally don't think strategically, or even tactically in elections.

Democrats run wordy campaigns, that tend to reinvent themselves week to week. They generally tend to spew rhetoric, and watch polls closely to see what rhetoric will score highest and adjust their stump speeched accordingly. We've seen Mrs. Clinton change her stance of the surge three times since her presidential campaign began, for example.

Republicans go in with a far more aggressive campaign, and usually keep it to just one or two very strong notes that are easy to understand. They are generally notes that register with their bases, energize them and usually allow them to win elections. This tactic tends to diminish the quality of the discussion on major issues, but it does tend to breed success at the polls.

It is also important to note however, that Republican candidates have already begun bashing Hillary in debates even though she has not won yet either. In fact, one debate a month or so ago, was riddled with Hillary-attacks across every single topic and candidate. So bashing a "straw-candidate" on the other side is a tactic used by both parties.

For now, bashing George Bush is working for Democrats. They will change their tactic when the presidential candidate for the Republicans is picked. I doubt they'll change it to something effective though. Democrats are notoriously out of tune with what your average American wants, and tend to run rather sublime, subtle campaigns that do not energize voters.

Answer 5

They have a plan of attack when it comes to this years election and they are sticking to it. They feel that the anti-Bush strategy will work for now until the Nominees are in place. Then they will begin to smear them and compare them to Bush. Will the strategy work? I don't know I don't think so. Pretty soon they will need to start doing damage control for congress

Answer 6

Easy, because it helps them every time they remind voters that the current Republican President is an utter disaster. And believe me, the '08 Repub nominee is going to be hurt by Bush's abysmal record.

Think about it this way, have you seen any of the Repub pols talking about Bush recently? Why do they mention Reagan every five seconds and rarely talk about Bush?

Think Rudy will be stumping with Bush next year if he gets the nom?

Wonder why.

Answer 7

it kind of feels Bush and Obama have plenty in basic, Bush is particularly a democrat and Obama is a a techniques leftist. the two considered one of them savor vast government and spending. We as in all American prefer somebody who will withstand the domicile and Senate and corruption, and say sufficient is sufficient. we prefer somebody who isn't a flesh presser, a all the way down to earth guy or woman who particularly comprehend the main highway human beings.

Answer 8

Well it worked for Bush in 2000 and 2004 when it seemed like he was running against Bill Clinton.

Answer 9

Because all but 1 of the GOP candidates are pushing to retain the 'status quo' with the exception of Ron Paul.

Answer 10

Because they are, in essence. The Republican candidates are promising to keep doing what Bush has been doing. It's how they feel they will keep their constituency. (That's not a criticism, it's just fact.)

Democrats are running against those policies because they feel that Americans are sick of them. (Again, not a criticism, just fact.)

A candidate is ALWAYS running against the current office-holder, whether they are literally doing so or not.