Gibbs: ‘We’re Not Running Against George W. Bush’


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

President Obama’s reelection campaign isn’t running against the specter of former President George W. Bush, said a top voice for the president’s 2012 campaign.

Robert Gibbs, the former White House press secretary-turned-campaign surrogate, accused the field of Republican presidential candidates of reviving the policies that caused the current economic difficulties. But that doesn’t mean the Obama campaign’s running against Bush, Gibbs maintained.

“We’re not running against George W. Bush,” he said on MSNBC, explaining that it’s just many of the policies of Bush “But many of the policies that got us into the mess that we’re trying to dig out of now, are the same policies that the frontrunners for the Republican nomination seek to go back to.”

“You’re going have a choice between going forward or going backward to a lot of the problems that got us into this mess,” Gibbs said, referencing a top tier of GOP candidates that includes Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R), former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.). “I think there’s going to be a very clear choice in this election in 2012.”



  1. Oh, Let’s see… Texas is creating 37% of all jobs in the country… Who is the governor of Texas? The Democrats can never stop blaming Bush! It’s almost 3 years now.

  2. Well of course there will be a clear choice – that’s no hiddush. The Democrats will want to run against Bush, but if the Republicans pick a “tea party” compatible candidate, they too will be running against Bush — and both sides will try to complain that the other is the tool of the Wall Street types (though if Romney is the Republican nominee this would be a problem since he was a Wall Street type earlier in his career – not a problem for Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Paul or any of the other Republicans).

  3. The president never got out of campaign mode. Everything is W’s fault. He takes no responsibility. Perhaps that’s still the issue for him? He has never been responsible for anything. He never had a real job. He never owned a business. He never had to make payroll.

  4. #4- that may be an argument against Bachmann. She has the same lack of experience, whether in politics or the real world. Perhaps being a insignificant backbencher who talks well isn’t an ideal credential to be President.

  5. #1– how come I keep hearing from the radical right that the economic disaster is Bill Clinton’s fault?!? last time I checked, he hasn’t been President in well over a decade (who led us with the best economy in recent history)

  6. #6- if most of the country perceives Obama as having been (and being) seriously underqualified to be president, nominating someone equally underqualified might be unwise, and Bachmann’s political and real world experiences put her in the same league as Obama.