Why 2004 WON'T be another 1992

No Dems 2004

[VRWCmember]

"Dukakis" was Greek for "Mondale", and "Kerry" is French for "Dukakis"!

[wardaddy]

In 2000, for instance, most analysts were convinced that a repeat of 1988 was in the making. It wasn’t hard to see why analysts thought this: the economy was good,

Actually, the economic downturn had begun around May of 2000.

Yes, there is no doubt Perot handed Clinton the presidency in 1992...none. 19% is a more than twice enough. One could even argue he gave it to Dole as well in 1996.

Buchanan is not crazy or irrational in my view however his views on isolationism and Zionism are flawed in my opinion. Aside from that I rather like him....like Jesse Helms, dependably culturally Conservative. But, yes he did hurt Bush the Elder at the base.

Yes, the Culture War is arguably second only to the War on Terror in importance this year....which is why it has become so metaphorically bloody so early. The Left's harping on Iraq is simply histrionics motivated by their fear they will have their social agendas stymied again.

The economy and even jobs seem fair enough to me contrary to the media's incessant harping. Gas prices are a problem.

Another FReeper said the media was more out for blood than ever. I concur emphatically...the worst I've seen in my 46 years....by far. They hate Bush almost as bad as they did Nixon.

More real Lefties. I think we have more Lefties now than ever before....especially culture and social engineering Lefties who dominate the media and academia as well. Fortunately, we have a large number of conservatives as well. I take none of this for granted. The media's onslaught has surprised me. Dubya only won last time around by incredibly good luck, 5 black robes, and some determined Cubans (and others) in Miami. I thought after 8 years of the Great Pretender that we were broken glass about as much as possible in 2000.

Kerry can beat Bush...make no mistake, but I don't think he will unless Bush missteps badly but it will be close. No McGovern, Dukakis or Mondale blowout these days, the Depression-WWII generations have largely and sadly passed on and what has replaced their wisdom is increasingly a complacent and lazy, obese, and ignorant bunch of trough-feeders and malignant narcissists so our work is cut out for us. We have to defeat Kerry and the media.

My compliments and comments.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Also the media is out for blood, and will kill anything positive about Bush until the elections!

Let 'em. The media has lost all credibility they had, with the public.

[international american]

Dane, the networks are far worse now...I was alive then...they are out for blood...I have never seen anything like this in my 50 years of living! And Bush ran a horrible campaign!

[PureSolace]

Here's my prediction... The 2004 elections will be a lot like the 2004 elections! :)

[GeorgeW23225]

Thanks for posting. I really enjoyed reading your thoughts on the election. Although there are a lot of variables, I think you are pretty much on target. I truly think this will be a replay of 1984, which I considered to be a landslide. Karl Rove is no fool. The dems, being as angry and hate filled as they are, are easy prey.
They keep taking the bait and falling into the trap. Hate destroys from within, and it loses elections.

But, I really think the bottom line is this. America, at least the one's who can think, love President Bush.They downright have a great affection for him. And just like Reagan, they want him to succeed. I've been involved in a lot of campaigns and this is the easiest I've had so far. Finding a Kerry supporter is difficult, and even when I find one, they aren't happy or enthusiastic about him. The bubble will burst for Kerry and the dems when the economy starts creating jobs, and when we kill Al Zawahiri and Osama Bin Laden. Not to mention, when Condi goes before the 9/11 commission, and straightens out the record on American Grandstander, Dick Clarke.

I'm so confident of her performance, that I think it should be on during "prime time".

My ONLY fear, at this point, is that by the time the dem convention rolls into Boston in July, Kerry will already be dead in the water. I hope he (we) can keep it fairly close, or at least close enough, until he gets the nomination. Then we can REALLY pour it on. Case in point, would be the current Bush ads, which in just 3 weeks, have caused a 29 point DROP in Kerry's favorables. But, if anyone can pull off this "tight rope act", Karl Rove can.

In the meantime, make sure all Bush supporters you know are registered and vote.

Final score: BUSH 56,000,000 & 38 STATES
KERRY 44,000,000 & 12 STATES

(my goal is for Bush to get MORE votes than anyone else in American history, and I'll do my best to make that a reality.)

[EdReform]

BTTT - read later...

[vpintheak]

About the funniest thing I heard all day was when I was listening to Rush and He said John Kerry would tell OPEC to increase production! What a laugh! Sure these Arabs are just gonna roll right over for you Johny! Whatever.

[cvq3842]

Very good post! You lay out the case very well.

We do seem, as a society, to be prone to such endless comparisons. I see this election more as similar to 1988 or 1996. But yes, every year is different.

If I had to predict today, I would say a 51% / 47% / 2% "other" split in popular vote, and of course an electoral win for Bush.

People are fond of saying that there are some states Bush won last time that he could lose this time. Bush does not have the election in the bag, but I think the Democrats are more likely to lose states that they carried narrowly last time. I can't see Ohio going for Kerry. I hope I'm right!

[buccaneer81]

I Agree , it's 1972 all over again. Bush has even governed like Nixon , liberal on spending and government growth but hard right on foreign policy and social issues.

I agree with the 1972 analogy, but by no means was Nixon far-right on foreign policy and social issues. Examples: Giving the vote to 18 year olds; establishment of the EPA; China policy; arms control (SALT 1) with the Soviets; wage and price contols (truly a bizarre mandate from a GOP president).

[BushisTheMan]

Yes, spitting Chrissy mentioned the Pew poll. But thanks to FR, I knew the numbers were false.

Unfortunately, last night's Republication guest (can't remember his name but on Arnold's election staff) wasn't up on the latest so he could counter spitting Chrissy.

[David Noles]

I agree with the 1972 analogy, but by no means was Nixon far-right on foreign policy and social issues. Examples: Giving the vote to 18 year olds; establishment of the EPA; China policy; arms control (SALT 1) with the Soviets; wage and price contols (truly a bizarre mandate from a GOP president).

Nixon was a hardliner on defence matters and conservative on social issues meaning abortion , religion ect. He was very liberal on big government.

[BushisTheMan]

Hillary's October surprise:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/3/30/123728.shtml

My guesses:
John Kerry will be assassinated by the VVAW?
Hillary lets loose on the Kerry intern scandal and blames Bush?
Hillary asked her French friends to invade America.
Hillary's friends (Hamas, Fatah Movement, etc.) attack the United States?

[WhirlwindAttack]

My biggest worry is that 2004 will be like 2000. But this time the rats will succeed to steal the election with computer vote fraud. With the machines gimmicked they won't even need the "dead rat" votes.

[Uncle George]

The first year of Bushes presidency, I predicted he would convince banks to lower housing intrest rates to SAVE the economy, and those HOUSING RATES DID spark our economic recovery thereafter: I now predict he will contact the RIGHT PEOPLE and the price of gasoline will TRICKLE DOWN. He will convince them: Fuel prices could hand the election to the SCUMACRATS if the industry doesn't lower the tab till the election is over. They will conceed; Better to give a little now than to fight a SCUMACRAT Presedentin the future.

[tkathy]

2004 will be the first true internet and talk radio election, where both have become a force to reckon with.

[olde north church]

RE: Gasoline Prices, (just for kicks)
If President Bush said he would go to war for oil in say Saudi, don't you think people would believe him? You know it and I know it's not true but 40 percent of the pods think that's what the Iraq War was anyway. Don't you think they would strip off enough voters to give President Bush a well deserved 2nd term? What would Kerry do to bring gas prices down, buy it from the French?

[walford]

Didn't we just invade the Oil Spigot of the Middle East? Give it a quarter turn in July or so and then sit back and prepare to party in November.

Unfortunately, oil production is still not at pre-war levels. Saddam really neglected the Iraqi oil facilities and won't be producing anything of significance until well after the election.

My more cynical side makes it tempting to believe that one reason the Demos forbade drilling in places like Alaska is precisely BECAUSE it would lessen our dependence on OPEC. My twisted reasoning is that they could then collude with the Saudis to cut back production at the right moment and effect our election results.

The Demos are fully aware that THEY are the preferred candidate in the Middle East [except Israel, of course]. See my tagline.

[.cnI redruM]

Here are a few more reasons why...

http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/GW/GWBush1_Start.htm

[ladyinred]

I am with you , fraud is what I fear too, and in fact, I KNOW they will get away with it in California, they always do.