Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can Bush Be Re-Elected?
Powerline ^ | 9/12/03 | RocketMan

Posted on 09/12/2003 9:29:40 PM PDT by NYC Republican

For a long time I've had a foreboding that President Bush will be a one-termer. For obvious reasons, that feeling has gotten stronger over the summer. Normally one might say that there is little point in making predictions fourteen months before an election, and certainly much may change. But I really doubt that anything that happens between now and then will matter much. I think that whoever the Democrats nominate will be our next President. And, yes, that very much includes Howard Dean.

It appears to me that the establishment simply will not allow President Bush to be re-elected. The media, in lockstep as usual, have gone into a full-time Bush-bashing mode. Magazines like Time and Newsweek have gone over the top in a manner that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. Last night in a gym I checked in on CNN periodically over an hour and a half. CNN's entire progamming during that time was an anti-Bush campaign commercial; it was so blatant as to verge on self-parody. But that doesn't make it ineffective.

Events between now and next November will matter, of course, but I'm afraid they won't matter much. By then, it will be firmly established "fact" that the Iraq war has been a failure. It simply makes no difference how well the situation there goes over the next year. The goalposts will be moved to whatever extent necessary. The truth is that the Iraq venture has gone astonishingly well so far, but that doesn't prevent the media from portraying it as a failure, and nothing that happens in the next year will change that.

The same applies to the economy. The economy has actually been doing quite well for some time, and the stock market has been booming for the past six months. The facts don't matter: voters are becoming increasingly convinced that the economy is bad, and after four years they will hold Bush responsible. When George Bush senior ran for re-election in 1992, the mini-recession of 1990-91 had been over for a year and a half, and the economy was growing fast. Media spin easily overcame that reality, and the same thing will happen next year.

The administration can help itself, of course; maybe bin Laden turns up dead, maybe Saddam is captured, maybe Bush pulls a rabbit out of the hat on Iraq's missing weapons. But the administration doesn't control the news cycle. After 24 hours, the media drumbeat will once again be failure.

Along with the twin themes of lousy economy and failure in Iraq, the never-ending story will be Bush's collapsing support and plunging poll ratings. This morning's Minneapolis Star Tribune has a typical article; Bush's approval rating in Minnesota is down to 49%, and he has lost the support of even a large number of conservatives. Meanwhile, Drudge headlines a poll showing Al Gore in a statistical dead heat with Bush. Bush's collapse will be the story line from here to next November, and I don't think there is a thing he can do about it.

For reasons I don't pretend to understand, President Bush, a palpably decent and honest man, is the object of more rage and hatred than any President since Lincoln. The Democrats will have a potent one-two punch next year: Bush the Liar to the party faithful, Bush the Bumbler to swing voters. The Democrats want this election much more than the Republicans, and I don't think they can be denied.

And I don't think it matters who the Democratic nominee is. The election will be a referendum on the Bush administration. If Howard Dean gets the nomination, he will turn into a paragon of wisdom overnight. But I don't think that will happen. I think Al Gore will get into the race, sweep to the nomination, and win relatively easily in November. Just when we thought we were finally rid of him for good.

Too pessimistic? I hope so. But the American voter has a childish streak that cannot be overestimated. Bush, unlike, say, Ronald Reagan, is not associated in the public's mind with happy things. He is associated with war and terror. A great many Americans long to return to the days when the Islamofascists may have been plotting against us, but we either didn't know or didn't have to care. Can they return to those days be tossing Bush out of office? Of course not. But that doesn't mean they won't try.

No one can predict what will happen between now and November 2004. But I don't think it makes much difference. I don't think Bush can be re-elected. ======================================================= BIG TRUNK demurs: I'm on record as asking to be awoken when it's over because Bush is on track to do fine in the 2004 election. The media are a joke, exactly as they were during the entirety of the Reagan administration. The hottest selling account of the Reagan-era economy and one that perfectly represented the media consensus was Barlett and Steeele's America: What Went Wrong, based on a 1992 series that appeared in every Knight-Ridder newspaper in the country. According to the media, even as late as 1992, Reagan-era America was mired in homelessness, unemployment, and depression; nevertheless, this was a period in which -- what was it? -- nineteen million new jobs were created.

The Reagan economic boom did not commence until early 1983. Once the boom began, one had to be a connoisseur of economic data to comprehend the state of the economy because it was so misreported in the mainstream media. We've been in recovery now for a few quarters, and significant alternatives to the mainstream media exist to report it. The jobs lost in the first three years are problematic, but I think folks will understand the economic toll taken by 9/11.

Among the unhappy events that Reagan was most prominently associated with during his first term were the firing of the air traffic controllers, the derogation of the Soviet Union as an evil empire, and the initiation of a defense program relentlessly derided as loony ("Star Wars"). The more things change...and by the way, if I recall correctly, Lincoln was re-elected by a comfortable margin over a formidable Wesley Clark-style opponent.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: electionpresident; extended; gwb2004
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221 next last
Interesting analysis. Glad to see I;m not alone in starting to worry. I still think Bush will eke out a victory, but these guys bring up some fine points... The Republicans had better start fighting back already (VP, Senate and House MLs).
1 posted on 09/12/2003 9:29:41 PM PDT by NYC Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
Interesting? I would call it stupid, pessimistic, defeatist and wrong.
2 posted on 09/12/2003 9:32:26 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
When did you stop beating your wife?
3 posted on 09/12/2003 9:33:15 PM PDT by txzman (Jer 23:29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
Hard to say. The media are extremely determined to get rid of Bush, no question. But so far, Bush has shown himself extremely skillful in dealing with the media.

Keep in mind that the media went all out against Bush in the original campaign, in coordination with electoral corruption in all the major Democrat strongholds, yet Bush still managed to win. People now now him much better than they did then.
4 posted on 09/12/2003 9:34:55 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
President Bush will win re-election..however.. I am not happy with the wimpy, spineless gop senators..first of all with lame frist "I hope the dems won't do it again"..i am glad he has term limited himself..
5 posted on 09/12/2003 9:35:02 PM PDT by BerniesFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
The major difference in 2004 from 1992: Lee Atwater died and wasn't around for the 1992 campaign like he was in 1988 - Karl Rove is going to get W over the top in 2004.
6 posted on 09/12/2003 9:36:53 PM PDT by BUSHdude2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
This author needs to go South for the light.
7 posted on 09/12/2003 9:36:57 PM PDT by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
Because of the things stated in this article, this is why I think Hillary will run in 2004.
Right now there is a percevied weakness with Bush. But there is a lot of time between now and the election and dynamics can change.
Right now though with this weakness if Hillary ever wants to run she has to make her move now or the opportunity may not come again. If Dean or any other Democrat wins against Bush then her time will never come.
I think Hillary will run and get thte nomination and that Clark will be her running mate for VP.
8 posted on 09/12/2003 9:37:57 PM PDT by Captain Peter Blood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
I worry too. I had a older lady come into the store last week that said, "you know, the Bush's are just bad luck". "We had war under his dad, the economy was bad"...Now look what we have had under his "boy"..."we have war, and the economy is bad"...I voted for them both, the first time.

Since this was a customer, I try really, really hard not to get political with the cliental...but this is something I heard.

9 posted on 09/12/2003 9:38:09 PM PDT by Brian S (Vote Freedom First!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BUSHdude2000
You are right about Lee Atwater..he was quite a strong figure..when he passed away..Daddy Bush lost a strength..
10 posted on 09/12/2003 9:39:29 PM PDT by BerniesFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
What a ridiculous article, the author is acting like the media is all powerful

It appears to me that the establishment simply will not allow President Bush to be re-elected

Get out your tin foil! If you wrap your head with it, the "establisment's" mind control beams will prevent you from voting for Dean!

Seriously, there is one thing and one thing only standing in the way of Bush's reelection: He's continual march to the left.

11 posted on 09/12/2003 9:40:10 PM PDT by rmmcdaniell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
1st Para: But I really doubt that anything that happens between now and then will matter much.

3rd Para: Events between now and next November will matter, of course, but I'm afraid they won't matter much.

I give up! Which is it! Get a grip!

12 posted on 09/12/2003 9:42:28 PM PDT by Tallguy (Just taking life with a grain of salt....oh, and a slice of lime and a shot of tequila...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rmmcdaniell
LOL
13 posted on 09/12/2003 9:43:21 PM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: rmmcdaniell
Bush's poll numbers are higher than Reagan's or Clinton's at this time in their first term.
14 posted on 09/12/2003 9:47:48 PM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
Let the redstream media continue to lie and trash Bush. Its costing them viewers. Fox is just getting bigger and the redstream continues to bleed red the more it rants. The RAT presstitutes continue to act as if the average man has no counterpoint to their propaganda but as this very website proves, they don't.
15 posted on 09/12/2003 9:52:14 PM PDT by Nateman (Socialism first, cancer second.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
That will be decided in large measure by weather or not he screws America's gun owners by passing new "Assault Weapon" and "Hi-Cap Magazine" bill into law.

We will know by Sept. 13 of 2004 what he has done.
If he signs new bans we will need a new Rep. candidate.

16 posted on 09/12/2003 9:52:23 PM PDT by Richard-SIA (Nuke the U.N!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
What the author of this article failed to point out is that Bush will go into next year's election with an enormous advantage over any opponent that should not be overlooked -- a pile of campaign cash that probably exceeds the combined totals of any six Democratic challengers.
17 posted on 09/12/2003 9:54:27 PM PDT by Alberta's Child ("To freedom, Alberta, horses . . . and women!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
With a continuing economic recovery, job creation, and stablization in Iraq, the 2004 election won't even be close.

Bush is in far better shape than many think. Sure Bush's approval is down a little, but not like the sensationalist liberal media has portrayed it.

Still, let's not become complacent and everyone work hard for a Bush landslide. It could also impact the House and Senate.

How to help re-elect President Bush:

1. Donate to Bush-Cheney '04 re-election campaign.
http://www.georgewbush.com

2. Join the Republican National Committee.
http://www.rnc.org/

3. Put a Bush 2004 bumper-sticker on your car, buy a Bush hat or t-shirt and wear it around. I get more complients and thumbs up on my Bush hat than anyone would believe. It shows grass root support.
http://www.georgewbushstore.com/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/scstore/bush_cheney_04_line.htm?L+scstore+qbgg9331+1063155855

4. Get involved with a your local Republican party and work the Bush campaign in 2004. Canvass, do literature drops, work a get out the vote phone bank.

5. Never back down from your beliefs!
18 posted on 09/12/2003 9:54:49 PM PDT by zencat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
Yeah but they was not higher than his Dad's. I think it also depends on who gets the nom. If Gerphart or Liberman does then I think an anti war left will go to Nader or someone else.
19 posted on 09/12/2003 9:55:28 PM PDT by Paul8148
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NYC Republican
Take a look at the campaign war chests.

The RATs all have agreed to federal funds and have a limit on what to spend between convention & election.

Bush has something like $200M to spend before convention, and federal funds after convention.

Bush convention is late, RAT convention is early. Result=Bush has more to spend on ads--maybe twice as much maybe 3x.

This is a big difference. Rmmember the same peolpe who watch the news watch the ads. If the ads are good, Bush wins.
20 posted on 09/12/2003 9:58:08 PM PDT by CurlyDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson