Andrew Romano: What Obama and George H.W. Bush Have in Common

Roundup: Media's Take

Andrew Romano is a senior writer for Newsweek.

Want to know what will happen to Barack Obama if he loses to Mitt Romney on Nov. 6? Just look at what happened to George H.W. Bush after he lost to Bill Clinton in 1992.

You remember George H.W. Bush, right? You know, the other George Bush? The one who acted all wimp-like; who shattered his "read my lips" tax pledge; who presided over a recession; who could only muster a jobless recovery in response; who added more than a trillion dollars to the national debt; and who was finally, unceremoniously dumped by America after one lackluster term, making way (thank goodness) for President Clinton’s centrist blend of balanced budgets and business-friendly policies—a blend that was directly responsible, incidentally, for 116 consecutive months of economic growth, the longest stretch in U.S. history.

Yeah, that George H.W. Bush. Without a second term, Obama will end up like him.

There’s only one problem: that George H.W. Bush never really existed. We just remember him that way. In reality, Bush was responsible for cutting the deficit, lowering unemployment, and spurring much of economic growth that buoyed Clinton throughout 1990s. But even though these improvements began, slowly but surely, during Bush’s stint in the Oval Office, none of them fully took effect in time to ensure his reelection.

Right now, the president finds himself in much the same predicament... 

comments powered by Disqus