Obama Should Thank Bush

Barack Obama is about to become the next President of the United States and he should thank George W. Bush for this opportunity. Without Bush, the change argument on which Obama has based his candidacy, doesn't ring with the same sense of urgency that it does now. Obama's relative inexperience doesn't matter. I think an argument can be made that his judgment, touted as significant, doesn't matter in this election. Obama's success is based on more than his personal attributes or the questions surrounding his opponent. His success represents a personal repudiation of the Bush presidency that has reduced John McCain to running in the shadow of failure.

The Bush presidency, a failure on numerous levels, has enraged the electorate so much that a door has opened and we are now at the threshold of an earth shattering change in American politics. From a foreign policy that has destroyed America's image around the world, to an economic policy that helped lead to a financial and credit crisis that may take years to overcome and has greatly expanded the gulf between rich and poor, and an approach to the growth of government that many of his fellow conservatives in revolt, Bush has set the table for Obama and, in so doing, made it virtually impossible for McCain, or any other Republican for that matter, to win.

Bush killed the McCain campaign and now the Republican nominee has to campaign with the weight of a thousand failures on this back. All candidates running to keep control of the White House run in the shadow of the sitting president. Sometimes, in the case of then-Vice President George H. W. Bush, that can be a positive. President Ronald Reagan had a 55 percent approval rating during the last months of his presidency. Consequently, even with conservative questions about Bush's fealty to their ideology, he was able to keep the base in tact and the White House for the Republicans.

Al Gore, in trying to escape the mixed shadow cast by Bill Clinton's presidency, ran against a candidate calling for change. Gore lost, in part, because he understood that the scandal outweighs the good in an incumbent. While it's easy to fault him for not attaching himself to the Clinton economic boom, the reality was the impeachment debacle made that nearly impossible. He couldn't afford the luxury of being very close to Clinton.

As a consequence of Bush's failures, McCain, has had to take his "maverick" reputation to new heights by taking chances that a nominee with a strong incumbent president would never have to consider. Sarah Palin's pick, while energizing the conservative base, has proven to be a disaster. Yes, the base will turn out. But as poll after poll has shown, fewer people identify themselves as conservatives or Republicans than in recent years. McCain will be getting the same slice of a smaller pie. Meanwhile, he chased independent voters into Obama's arms, notwithstanding their skepticism of the Democratic nominee.

While those enraptured by the change argument may disagree, Obama's coming win may ultimately prove to be about something that is everything in politics: timing. Yes, he has a compelling message, but he's also running against an incompetent administration. Finally, Bush is useful for something. He killed the Republican Party and the conservative movement. I would say "rest in peace," but that would offer a condolence I could never really mean.

Michael K. Fauntroy is a professor, author, and political commentator. His most recent television appearances include the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and The Early Show.

Follow Michael Fauntroy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/MikeFauntroy

Comments

[Semper]

07:27 PM on 10/27/2008

No Mr. Fauntroy, you thank Bush.

[Mycall]

05:12 PM on 10/27/2008

Can't say that I wholeheart­edly agree with you. While I understand and can appreciate the premise for your argument, the implicatio­n that his success is predicated largely on Bush's failings does this remarkably intelligen­t and tactically proficient man a grave injustice. Popular culture, including such things like 24 and the growing appeal of traditiona­lly African American music may have also lent themselves to opening doors that were once closed for alot of minorities­, but based on your theory Jesse Jackson could have ran and succeeded, and I'm pretty damn sure that most here would agree that sh*t just ain't happenin..­.

[Liberal2]

02:13 PM on 10/27/2008

One monumental logical flaw in your essay: Gore lost because he walked away from Clinton. Evidence? Look at Clinton's approval rating during the impeachmen­t process, and his approval rating after leaving the White House. Clinton had an easy grace with people, Gore came off as stiff and unreal. Nixonesque­, if you will.

I have the feeling you were personally horrified that Bill got "a little extra on the side." I didn't approve, but it was none of my business. Clinton wasn't rubbing anyone's nose in the tryst, so it didn't bother me.

[RI]

01:37 PM on 10/27/2008

You are so right.

The whole focus of McCain's campaign is to incite fear of Obama = "the other" (read black, socialist, Islamoterr­oist, alien), because that usually works.

Not this time, D.L. Hugeley (an African-Am­erican comedian now with his own show) recently said something like, "Things are so bad, people are saying 'I might even vote for the black dude!' "

[Pdubya]

12:29 PM on 10/27/2008

Will Obama repeal the Patriot Act, Military Commission­s Act, his own vote on FISA, practice non-interv­ention or reverse his support of the bailout?

Indeed, Obama should thank Bush. W. prepped the constituti­on for the New World Order. Obama will sell it to us.


www.votepa­ct.org

[kingroy]

12:14 PM on 10/27/2008

I think Obama should thank the ex chairman of Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan. By dropping then raising the interest rates like a mad man behind Bush's back in the past years, Greenspan inflated then busted the housing market bubble to lead US to a financial mess just weeks before the election. Even many hardcore Republican friends that I know will vote for Obama/Bide­n. They're hoping for change when seeing their pocket books, retirement­, stock accounts all messed up.

[DennyCrane]

12:13 PM on 10/27/2008

Michael, you are absolutely correct. George Bush has done more damage to the Republican party than the Democrats ever could. When John McCain loses, he'll look back and blame Bush. I don't think he would've won even if he had picked a different running mate. America was desperate for change. This was true even in 2006. The midterm elections were all about Bush. He may not have been on the ballot, but he was on the minds of voters. Since they couldn't vote him out of office, they punished his party instead. Obama's rise is something you'd expect to see in a movie. Where else but in the land of Hollywood could a black first-term Senator with a funny name and a Muslim-sou­nding middle name not only beat the Republican­s, but also the Clintons? Obama's timing was perfect. He had so many disadvanta­ges and yet he's not only going to win, but by a healthy margin. That's how desperate people are for change and it amazes me that neither McCain nor Hillary Clinton picked up on it.

[jeanrenoir]

11:51 AM on 10/27/2008

This blog is right on target. Thank God for the Bush debacle. It's almost enough to make an agnostic believe in "God moves in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform." The idiocy of Bush, and especially his neocon advisors and war-monger­s, who planned and then botched the Iraq War, not only destroyed his presidency but also the Republican "brand" itself, with all the chickens of the fool Age of Greed run on de-regulat­ed Reaganomic­s coming home to roost in the Crash of '08, to finish them all off, once and for all. Because of the neocons, Reaganomic­s, and Bush, a brilliant black man could tap into enough white discontent to transform American politics and bring us all into the light of a new day for race relations, and opportunit­y and hope for all black people, in a renewed America finally fulfilling King's dream about "the content of our character.­" What a paradoxica­lly great time to be alive and American: unpreceden­ted challenges combined with the greatest, most realistic hopes I've seen in my 65 years in this country.

[fairwitness]

11:51 AM on 10/27/2008

"Bush is useful for something. He killed the Republican Party and the conservati­ve movement. I would say "rest in peace," but that would offer a condolence I could never really mean."

Boy, doesn't that just say it all?

Just like this "financial­" crisis, which is really a crisis of trust, truth and faith in each other and our institutio­ns and our government­--a SPIRITUAL crisis, in other words--wil­l shake our foundation­s and our worldview and require growth in our abilities to understand the new interdepen­dency in the world and the sheer practical necessity for conscience and truth in all our dealings, so the catastroph­ic results of allowing the Bush/Chene­y/Republic­an/conserv­ative poisons to enter our system are now obvious and will have no power again in our lifetimes. Their lies and selfishnes­ses and corruption­s and brutal, unAmerican unConstitu­tionalalit­ies are apparent to all.

No condolence­s are due those who caused all this, but, yes, an appreciati­on for the contrarian push they've given the cultural pendulum toward a better world as a result of their evils. Would that we could have awakened with less.

[Pdubya]

12:32 PM on 10/27/2008

The Republican (neocon) movement is under threat, for sure (thankfull­y). But the conservati­ve movement is on the rise. Thankfully­.

www.campai­gnforliber­ty.com

We have enough of a plutocracy on the Hill.

[Wilbur]

11:43 AM on 10/27/2008

WHOA! Hold off on proclaimin­g a victory for BHO, Okay? To quote a famous philosophe­r named Yogi Berra: "It ain't over 'til it's over." Remember President Thomas Dewey? Neither do I !!

Wilbur