Five years ago. Barack Obama was running for president for the first time. George W. Bush was president, and Obama was running as the anti-Bush. Everything about his pitch to voters was essentially, “Bush has messed everything up, so I’m going to give you hope and change by doing everything differently.”
Five years later, what’s really different?
Bush supporters would protest that Obama is far worse than their man. They have a visceral hatred for Obama, because he represents everything they hate. They see Bush as tough-minded and patriotic, whereas they see Obama as a weak peacenik who’s giving everything to welfare recipients.
Obama supporters also protest, because they are certain that Bush was far worse than the man they saw as a savior. They saw Bush as stupid and war-like, whereas they see Obama as smart and kind-hearted. They see Bush as hateful to minorities and immigrants, but Obama is generous and is a leader who represents the country’s best values.
When it comes to actual governing and results, both groups are wrong. If you ignore their rhetoric to their own parties’ voters, you find they have much more in common that you’d think. I’ve been saying this for years, but people in the mainstream of the political system are now saying the same thing.
In a new article from the Associated Press this week, there’s a look at how these two men who are so different in ideology, personality and so forth have ended up with such similar policies.

Obama: ‘…all the choices we’ve made have been the right ones…’
‘Tolerant’ left seethes with hate if you don’t accept ‘gender theory’
Why waste your one life on political scandal that won’t change anything?
Advice to fast food restaurant execs: stop ‘innovating,’ do the basics right
Conflict tonight left me fearing old demons were breaking free
What do we prove with huge houses we can’t afford to pay for or even fill?
Democrats to Cory Booker: There’s no room for honesty in politics
I am angry that life doesn’t work the way I once learned it should