There’s an important Bush factor — unless Democrats win

Scott McClellan was asked today how he’d respond to Dems’ arguments that yesterday’s election results show that the president is a drag on Republicans. McClellan said campaigns tend to hinge on state issues, not federal.

“I’m sure [Democrats are] going to say a lot of things like that, but I think the facts say otherwise. I don’t think any thorough analysis of the election results will show that the elections were decided on anything other than local and state issues and the candidates and their agendas. That’s what I think. And I think that if you look at the facts, that bears that out.

Interesting. As far as the White House is concerned, statewide races, even in states Bush carried easily, aren’t affected at all by the president’s support.

Oddly enough, the White House took a far different line on November 6, 2002, when Ari Fleischer held a press briefing the day after Republicans had a far better year.

“[T]his election, in the view of most analysts, is coming down to a variety of factors, and those factors are the President’s strong, favorable opinion across the country, the work the President is doing on behalf of the candidates, a variety of local issues, the strength of our candidates.”

Got that? When Democrats win statewide races, according to the White House, local and state issues are the only factors driving the election. When Republicans win, voters are thinking about Bush and the president’s support for the candidates.

It’s nice of the Bush gang to clear this up for us.

I sure hope the pay poor Scott real well. It’s got to be hard going out day after day to methodically destroy your own credibility.

  • Destroy his own credibility? None of them have any credibility. Day after day, he’s walling yourself into a hell in which he can no longer tell the difference between the truth or a lie.

  • Maybe they forgot to read all the poll results from St. Paul, where it was pretty clear that voters only turned against Democratic Mayor Randy Kelly because he endorsed Bush last year.

    Seriously- he went down 69-31 to another Democrat, and that was the only significant reason. There were essentially no local issues that mattered one bit.

  • They werent much interested in the truth before. Now that they are in trouble, they’ve jettisoned it completely. The truth be damned!

    If you don’t understand how these people “think”, please see the below article, especially the section on the “reality-based community”. It’s still a chilling read. In fact, the more time goes by, the more chilling it becomes…

    “Without a Doubt” by Ron Suskind

    http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/sloth/2004-10-16b.html

  • The senator or congressman, I forget which, in Arizona said he does not want bush campaigning for him.

  • Comments are closed.