Clanad, nobody mentions G W Bush. Why is that? Reagan gets mentioned and he was long ago.Do you not blame parties, but only the incumbent, for policies over there, even when the President's can't be carried out because the opposition party in Congress blocks them?
From the innocent and ignorant standpoint of a Briton, who is only informed by the Economist and various American papers, it seems that the Romney line is to say "Forget that my policies were tried and got us into this mess , but notice that Obama has failed to get us out of it yet, so elect me so I can get us back where we were when they were tried last time and make a change for the worse". Obama has indeed not done as well as he might; the Economist certainly thinks so; but that seems a poor reason for preferring Romney. No doubt, Republicans will say that Reagan's policies were, or would have been, Romney's but that is debatable and true, if at all, of Reagan's time. Bush doesn't get a mention.