To put it simply, "Bush Bush Bush Bush PORTMAN Bush Bush Bush Bush."
We discussed the initial strategy here, then highlighted how there already is evidence it won't work here. Clearly, the Ohio Dems are relying totally and completely on the Bush canard.
Well, Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post has provided us yet more perspective on this all-too-fallible strategy.
A look back at history suggests that even the most disliked of presidents tend to linger over their party's candidates only while they remain in office.Now, after 2008 I can understand how difficult it must be for Ohio Democrats to pull away from their strategy. And by all means, feel free to continue with your effort.
A look back at history suggests that even the most disliked of presidents tend to linger over their party's candidates only while they remain in office.
In 1974, the resignation of President Richard M. Nixon -- coming as it did just three months before a midterm election -- badly damaged his party, which lost 48 House seats and five Senate seats. Two years later Jimmy Carter was elected president largely on his pledge to be the anti-Nixon -- but congressional Republicans lost only a single seat in the House and no seats in the Senate.
Carter's ineffectual presidency cost him the White House and his party 34 House seats and a whopping 12 Senate seats in 1980 but two years later any lingering distaste for Carter had clearly worn off as Democrats picked up 26 House districts.
Just don't spend much time getting ready for any Victory Party balloon drop.