News What can Bush do to gain back favor?

[2CentsWorth]

What if gas in Iraq drops to 5 cents per gallon. Would that work? It would almost be like killing two birds with one stone.

Good one.

 

[Informal Logic]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/22/national/nationalspecial/22bush.html
From a NY Times article today:

Bush Compares Responses to Hurricane, Terrorism
By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: September 22, 2005

WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 - President Bush on Wednesday for the first time linked the American response to terrorism and its response to Hurricane Katrina, declaring that the United States is emerging a stronger nation from both challenges, and saying that terrorists look at the storm's devastation "and wish they had caused it."

Mr. Bush's speech, at a luncheon for the Republican Jewish Coalition, appeared to be part of a White House strategy to restore the luster of strong leadership that Mr. Bush enjoyed after the Sept. 11 attacks, and that administration officials fear he has lost in the faltering response to the hurricane.

WTF? Does he really expect to maintain popularity with fear mongering in this way?

Mr. Bush said he had been "thinking a lot" about the comparisons between the response to the attacks in New York and Washington, and the storm devastation.

...In weaving the themes, Mr. Bush said that just as the United States would not let an act of nature blow the nation off course, it would not let the acts of terrorsts drive it out of Iraq. "No matter how many car bombs there are, these terrorists cannot stop the march of freedom in Iraq," he told the luncheon crowd, which include current and former members of his administration and some of his larger campaign donors.

And we see he still thinks a lot about things...and he still connects terrorism to the invasion of Iraq.

 

[BobG]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/22/national/nationalspecial/22bush.html
From a NY Times article today:

Bush Compares Responses to Hurricane, Terrorism
By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: September 22, 2005

WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 - President Bush on Wednesday for the first time linked the American response to terrorism and its response to Hurricane Katrina, declaring that the United States is emerging a stronger nation from both challenges, and saying that terrorists look at the storm's devastation "and wish they had caused it."

Mr. Bush's speech, at a luncheon for the Republican Jewish Coalition, appeared to be part of a White House strategy to restore the luster of strong leadership that Mr. Bush enjoyed after the Sept. 11 attacks, and that administration officials fear he has lost in the faltering response to the hurricane.

WTF? Does he really expect to maintain popularity with fear mongering in this way?

In all fairness, Sanger took a tiny quote out of context and completely twisted the message.

Here's the paragraph in the speech where Bush said "and wish they had caused it."

You know, something we -- I've been thinking a lot about how America has responded, and it's clear to me that Americans value human life, and value every person as important. And that stands in stark contrast, by the way, to the terrorists we have to deal with. You see, we look at the destruction caused by Katrina, and our hearts break. They're the kind of people who look at Katrina and wish they had caused it. We're in a war against these people. It's a war on terror. These are evil men who target the suffering. They killed 3,000 people on September the 11th, 2001. And they've continued to kill. See, sometimes we forget about the evil deeds of these people. They've killed in Madrid, and Istanbul, and Baghdad, and Bali, and London, and Sharm el-Sheikh, and Jerusalem, and Tel Aviv. Around the world they continue to kill.

I have to admit, you wonder why Bush would mention hurricanes and terrorists in the same paragraph - they would seem to have little relevance to each other. Was it the almost subliminal linking of one bad thing to another unrelated bad thing just to amplify the bad feeling the audience would get when they think of terrorists? Was it the seemingly subliminal link that ticked off Sanger?

 

[Informal Logic]

In all fairness, Sanger took a tiny quote out of context and completely twisted the message.

Here's the paragraph in the speech where Bush said "and wish they had caused it."



I have to admit, you wonder why Bush would mention hurricanes and terrorists in the same paragraph - they would seem to have little relevance to each other. Was it the almost subliminal linking of one bad thing to another unrelated bad thing just to amplify the bad feeling the audience would get when they think of terrorists? Was it the seemingly subliminal link that ticked off Sanger?

I edited my post in adding more from the article. Sanger does provide a more exact quote later in the article... But Bush's continued claims that the war on terror is being fought in Iraq is really angering to me.

 

[Anttech]

But Bush's continued claims that the war on terror is being fought in Iraq is really angering to me.

yes, me too... It shows what type of person he is, or that the current administration is, that they feel then need to link 9/11 with Iraq, or even terrorism in general with the war in Iraq...

 

[pattylou]

It angers me because it works. And that shows me what kind of people my fellow human beings are - ie basically good but able to be ruled by fear.

We ought to be able to rise above fear and use rational thought. Linking things the way Bush does... Geeze.

In fairness, it seems that most Americans are able to see through this bad rhetoric.

 

[deckart]

I think he's doing a fine job. One day Iraq will be a Democracy. Women will have rights they've never known. People will enjoy a freedom that they've never known. I see a lot of Bush bashing but not a lot of constructive solutions to issues he is addressing.

 

[pattylou]

The solution is obvious, Deckart.

It was a wiser course to have let Iraq reach democracy on its own. When a society decides to reach for democracy from within itself, it works.

When "freedom" is *imposed* on the society from another source, things like insurgencies happen.

The solutions to the current Middle East problems (some of which are of our own making) are also right there, staring at you in the headlines. Do you need me to point them out to you one by one?

 

[SOS2008]

I think he's doing a fine job. One day Iraq will be a Democracy. Women will have rights they've never known. People will enjoy a freedom that they've never known. I see a lot of Bush bashing but not a lot of constructive solutions to issues he is addressing.

I will respond with constructive solutions in your thread on the topic. Aside from contradiction between your post in this thread and that thread:

Democracy is the best form of government for humans, IMO. But, I don't believe it is necessarily good for the Muslim culture and religeous value system. And that is one of the reasons so many of them are threatened by us. Their way of life is going to change drastically as a Democracy.

Please provide evidence to support your predictions.

 

[Townsend]

Please provide evidence to support your predictions.

Please provide logical justification for demanding evidence. It would be a nice trick since deckart clearly said IMO...meaning the premises for his prediction are his opinion.

I don't see why people cannot reasonably discuss things based on their opinions. If you have some information which would better inform people and help them to form a better opinion then just state it. If you disagree with someone's premises then say so...if you think their argument is invalid then explain why...

 

[pattylou]

...if you think their argument is invalid then explain why...

Deckart's argument is invalid.

Insofar as the middle east is a mess, it is hard to give a black and white answer as to "what to do" in the middle east.

But to pretend the democrats haven't been voicing alternatives for the past couple years is... invalid. It's also apparently an attempt to call the opposition brainless or ineffectual or some such, which is a pathetic maneuver.

Seems much more likely to me that Deckart knows what the administration wants to do ... simply because that's in the news. I'd be surprised if Deckart ever newsgoogles "John Conyers" or "Barbara Boxer" for example, to identify some ideas that are from the left end of the current congress.

Deckart? What do you have to say to this? I'm calling your bluff.

 

[SOS2008]

Please provide logical justification for demanding evidence. It would be a nice trick since deckart clearly said IMO...meaning the premises for his prediction are his opinion.

I don't see why people cannot reasonably discuss things based on their opinions. If you have some information which would better inform people and help them to form a better opinion then just state it. If you disagree with someone's premises then say so...if you think their argument is invalid then explain why...

I have responded more fully in the other thread. I understand your point about opinion, but even opinion should have some basis--especially in an academic forum. Those who oppose the war continuously provide evidence for why they feel the invasion is failing. If someone claims the war is succeeding, why shouldn't we expect similar evidence?

 

[deckart]

I have to say that I was mearly expressing my opinion. And not even an argument, pattylou. Though it could become one. I don't have a lot of published information to back up my opion either. So my arguments won't carry a lot of weight. My bluff is called, I lose. But, none-the-less I have an opion. :)

 

[BobG]

I think he's doing a fine job. One day Iraq will be a Democracy. Women will have rights they've never known. People will enjoy a freedom that they've never known. I see a lot of Bush bashing but not a lot of constructive solutions to issues he is addressing.

If Iraq's draft constitution is passed, I find it hard to see how women will enjoy a freedom they've never known.

I also find it hard to see how the Sunnis will ever accept it - it seriously disadvantages them. I can understand the Kurds and Shi'ites may not be that sympathetic towards Sunnnis after Hussein's Sunni Baathist regime, but it's almost a guarantee that Iraq will be fighting Sunnis for several more years.

Finding a constructive solution to Iraq is a little like applying for 20 some credit cards, selling your house and car, and investing every dime you have plus every dime of credit you have in lottery tickets. Just about every constructive solution to the problem you just created will take years and years. In that situation, some people would opt for the less constructive solution - declare bankruptcy.

The most likley solution to be adopted by the US is equivalent to declaring bankruptcy. Bush opened a huge mess by invading Iraq and the most likely result is that the US will become frustrated and just leave the mess behind.

 

[loseyourname]

I edited my post in adding more from the article. Sanger does provide a more exact quote later in the article... But Bush's continued claims that the war on terror is being fought in Iraq is really angering to me.

At this point it is, since many terrorists have gone to Iraq. I'm pretty sure that's what he means.

Don't get me wrong, though. There are still plenty of other things to piss you off.

 

[Informal Logic]

At this point it is, since many terrorists have gone to Iraq. I'm pretty sure that's what he means.

Don't get me wrong, though. There are still plenty of other things to piss you off.

I know what you are saying. As for Bush -

1) if he had not invaded Iraq in the first place terrorists would not be there
2) the majority of resistance continues to come from insurgents (Iraqi Sunnis)
3) continual linking of the "war on terror" and Iraq is NOT excusable anymore

Would someone please slap that man up the side of his head?

 

[SOS2008]

"Anti-war demonstrators stage day of protest
Tens of thousands rally in marathon day of song, remembrance"

Associated Press
Updated: 2:06 p.m. ET Sept. 24, 2005

WASHINGTON - Opponents of the war in Iraq marched by the tens of thousands Saturday in a clamorous day of protest, song and remembrance of the dead, some showing surprisingly diverse political views even as they spoke with one loud voice in wanting U.S. troops home.

The surging crowd, shouting “Bush out now” and “Peace now,” marched in front of the White House and then toward the Washington Monument in an 11-hour marathon of dissent.

They were young people with green hair, nuns whose anti-war activism dates to Vietnam, parents mourning their children in uniform lost in Iraq, and uncountable families motivated for the first time to protest.
---------------
From the stage...speeches were hard-edged and critical of Bush on far more fronts than Iraq. Groups representing a bazaar of causes attacked administration policies on the poor, on hurricane response, on the Cuban embargo and much more.

London protest
The protest in the capital showcased a series of demonstrations in foreign and other U.S. cities. A crowd in London, estimated by police at 10,000, marched in support of withdrawing British troops from Iraq.
---------------
Separately, hundreds of opponents of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund danced to the beat of drums in the Dupont Circle part of the city before marching toward the White House to join the anti-war protesters coming from the Ellipse.

“Probably the justification offered for most wars is tied in with economics,” said Jack Brady, 57, a Washington architect in the anti-IMF protest. “And the losers are the people, for the most part.”
---------------
Supporters of Bush’s policy in Iraq assembled in smaller numbers to get their voice heard in the day’s anti-war din. About 150 of them rallied at the U.S. Navy Memorial.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9463993/
Uh-oh.

 

[McGyver]

Become a Democrat!

 

[Mk]

Analogy: if you are financially viable and your children are sick, you should not be going to work until they are recovering. If you love your kids, you will not be able to work with a clear mind anyway. If you do not take care of your children, your children will not take care of you.

Then again, if groups of people all around the world are undercover and waiting for the moment you turn your back you may want to stave them off.

Is the child sick? Or does the child just think he is?

 

[BobG]

Well, maybe Bush has decided the best way to gain back favor is to turn into Jimmy Carter.

Now he's urging Americans to conserve gasoline, helping poor people, talking about the importance of diversity on the US Supreme Court, and he actually seemed to learn something during the time he spent with NORTHCOM generals in Colorado Springs.

In no time at all, all the Republicans on the forum will despise him and all the Democrats will love him.

In all seriousness, there does seem to be a drastic change in tone over the last week or so. I'm starting to wonder if popular opinion has dropped so far that his administration has decided a change in direction might be in order.

 

[McGyver]

Well, maybe Bush has decided the best way to gain back favor is to turn into Jimmy Carter.

Now he's urging Americans to conserve gasoline, helping poor people, talking about the importance of diversity on the US Supreme Court, and he actually seemed to learn something during the time he spent with NORTHCOM generals in Colorado Springs.

In no time at all, all the Republicans on the forum will despise him and all the Democrats will love him.

In all seriousness, there does seem to be a drastic change in tone over the last week or so. I'm starting to wonder if popular opinion has dropped so far that his administration has decided a change in direction might be in order.

So true - the comparisons to Jimmy Carter. In a matter of several weeks, the man who thought he had a free and clear pass/mandate to enact his own agenda - has been humbled to that of Jimmy Carter.

He keeps taking Presidential trips to the hurricane region, but it doesn't appear to be helping his poll numbers. Today, it was announced that Senator John McCain met with the demonstrating mother (forgot name) of a boy killed in Iraq. That could have been Bush in that one on one! Big points for McCain for 2008 run.

I think Bush is finally going to have to stand up and make his case over his policies and appointments in his administration. He looks worse each day on camera. He could really use Colin Powell right now! Powel could be the guy capable of overseeing the rebuilding of New Orleans - but I believe his interest in working with Bush or any public office is not favorable.

Making sense amidst chaos requires patience, tolerance, and vision.
www.diaceph.com

 

[faust9]

He can try putting his wife on a stupid TV show:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/television/2002522643_weblaura26.html

 

[pattylou]

Oh my God.

Are the American people stupid enough to respond positively to this, or is just Bush stupid for doing it?

WASHINGTON — Facing criticism that he appeared disengaged from the disaster wrought by Hurricane Katrina, President Bush has been looking for opportunities to show his concern. But the White House will take the effort a step further Tuesday, venturing into untested waters by putting the nation's first lady on reality television.

Laura Bush will travel to storm-damaged Biloxi, Miss., to film a spot on the feel-good, wish-granting hit "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition." Mrs. Bush sought to be on the program because she shares the "same principles" that the producers hold, her press secretary said.

And... doesn't it still seem more than a little "disengaged" to re-do a single home with all the hoopla of national TV/popular reality series, in light of the thousands of homes that should benefit from such a thing?

This is nuts.

 

[Burnsys]

He should say this:

Http://200.49.210.251/chasco/bush.wmv[/URL]
(Right Click on the link and then Save Target As.. Then Watch the video)

Yo has to see this speech.

 

[SOS2008]

Oh my God.

Are the American people stupid enough to respond positively to this, or is just Bush stupid for doing it?



And... doesn't it still seem more than a little "disengaged" to re-do a single home with all the hoopla of national TV/popular reality series, in light of the thousands of homes that should benefit from such a thing?

This is nuts.

Laura has been used a lot to improve Bush's image--for example Bush has been coached to place her in front of him when the news media shoots footage of them. Whose house will they re-do, Trent Lott's?

 

[pattylou]

He should say this:

Http://200.49.210.251/chasco/bush.wmv[/URL]
(Right Click on the link and then Save Target As.. Then Watch the video)

Yo has to see this speech.[/QUOTE]
Mui bien. Gracias.

 

[pattylou]

Laura has been used a lot to improve Bush's image--for example Bush has been coached to place her in front of him when the news media shoots footage of them.

Has it ever worked? Her trip to the ME was a laughingstock, wasn't it?

 

[SOS2008]

Has it ever worked? Her trip to the ME was a laughingstock, wasn't it?

I've really felt sorry for her. That must have been stressful, and I must say she was a trooper about it. Interesting though how Hillary was criticized for intervening in her husband's affairs, but when Laura is put to the task it is considered a positive thing.

 

[2CentsWorth]

Whose house will they re-do, Trent Lott's?

Who will get the contract, Halliburton?

 

[outsider]

Then again, if groups of people all around the world are undercover and waiting for the moment you turn your back you may want to stave them off.

Is the child sick? Or does the child just think he is?

MK, I don't know how you read my post... u must be heartless to imply that the victims of hurricane katrina only thought they were sick. My point was that there was a disaster on the homefront. Protecting your home does not necessarily mean attacking your neighbors (which is what the Bush Administration is doing). Attacking others to free their people feels too much like social services gone mad. The children lose their birth parents, become children of the state until new parents are found and the new parents may not be the best either... sing along: what a wonderful world.

 

[Polly]

So, what do you propose?

Be tried for war crimes, do time in a zoo in Iraq living with apes in a shed and subsisting on the banana skin people spare him.

*right polly dream on*

 

[Skyhunter]

He keeps taking Presidential trips to the hurricane region, but it doesn't appear to be helping his poll numbers. Today, it was announced that Senator John McCain met with the demonstrating mother (forgot name) of a boy killed in Iraq. That could have been Bush in that one on one! Big points for McCain for 2008 run.

He met with Cindy Sheehan, and afterward she called him a "warmonger".

 

[Astronuc]

Bush's Job Approval Remains Low
Key Groups Unhappy With President's Performance

WASHINGTON (Oct. 8, AP) - Critical elements in President Bush's political coalition have grown less enthusiastic about the job he is doing, an AP-Ipsos poll found. That's a troubling development for a president trying to firm up his base of support.

Evangelical voters, Republican men, Southerners and Protestants have lost some intensity in their support for the president since the beginning of this year.

The White House is already struggling to keep the Republican base from eroding because of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, hurricane-recovery spending projects, immigration and other issues.

"Politically, this is very serious for the president," said James Thurber, a political scientist at American University. "If the base of his party has lost faith, that could spell trouble for his policy agenda and for the party generally."

The president's overall job approval is at 39 percent - with 21 percent strongly approving.

The number of people who strongly approve of Bush's job performance has eroded over the last year, most notably among key groups like evangelical voters, down from 49 percent who strongly approved in January to 33 percent now; Republican men, down from 57 percent to 42 percent; Protestants, down from 36 percent to 25 percent; and Southerners, down from 32 percent to 22 percent.

While four of five Republicans say they approve of Bush's job performance, enthusiasm in that support has dipped over the last year.

Funny, most of the Republican/conservatives with whom I've spoken regret voting for Bush.

 

[BobG]

Bush's Job Approval Remains Low
Key Groups Unhappy With President's Performance


Funny, most of the Republican/conservatives with whom I've spoken regret voting for Bush.

Stranger still was this poll from CBS News poll:

"What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?"

War in Iraq.......18
Economy/Jobs.....16
Gas/Heating oil crisis.....5
The President/George W. Bush..5
Terrorism (general).....4
Other.......45
Unsure.......7

Bush is moving up the list. He's now considered a bigger problem than terrorism.

 

[pattylou]

Stranger still was this poll from CBS News poll:

"What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?"

War in Iraq.......18
Economy/Jobs.....16
Gas/Heating oil crisis.....5
The President/George W. Bush..5
Terrorism (general).....4
Other.......45
Unsure.......7

Bush is moving up the list. He's now considered a bigger problem than terrorism.

Wow! Of course, a direct matchoff between 'terrorism' and 'Bush' wouldn't see him getting more points... but WOW!

 

[faust9]

Stranger still was this poll from CBS News poll:

"What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?"

War in Iraq.......18
Economy/Jobs.....16
Gas/Heating oil crisis.....5
The President/George W. Bush..5
Terrorism (general).....4
Other.......45
Unsure.......7

Bush is moving up the list. He's now considered a bigger problem than terrorism.

OMG how hilarious! It seems we will have a lame duck president sitting in office for two years instead of the usual 2 months.

 

[Lapin Dormant]

What can Bushy do to gain back favor?

RESIGN!


LD
Needed to lengthen the message .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. hops off[/color]

 

[loseyourname]

RESIGN!


LD
Needed to lengthen the message .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. hops off[/color]

I think if you take a historical perspective, it seems that presidents who fall deeply out of favor (Hoover, Nixon) only begin to have good things said about them once they die. Everybody is a friend at your funeral. Simply leaving office doesn't seem to do the trick, though.

 

[Lapin Dormant]

I think if you take a historical perspective, it seems that presidents who fall deeply out of favor (Hoover, Nixon) only begin to have good things said about them once they die. Everybody is a friend at your funeral. Simply leaving office doesn't seem to do the trick, though.

All the more reason then .. .. .. .. Right?

 

[SOS2008]

I think if you take a historical perspective, it seems that presidents who fall deeply out of favor (Hoover, Nixon) only begin to have good things said about them once they die. Everybody is a friend at your funeral. Simply leaving office doesn't seem to do the trick, though.

I don't recall much discussion on Hoover, but Nixon (C/O Kissinger) does have achievements to his name. I've posted before that it is often the other way around, using FDR and JFK as examples. I’m not sure how Bush will ever be seen as doing anything good for our country.

 

[Lapin Dormant]

Initially he was seen as a "strong leader" in his responce to 9/11 although now he seems to be trying to recapture that feeling and it just isn't there anymore, fear dissapates, over time, if it is NOT re-enforced, and especially if knowledge comes to fill the viod that permitted the fear to take hold in the first place.

After that he will be remembered as the one who removed, from the Most Free Nation, on the planet, the Most of their freedoms. (IMO)

LD
.. .. .. hops /off[/color]

 

[SOS2008]

A few articles in Newsweek this month:

Finding His Floor
The new NEWSWEEK Poll finds President Bush’s support holding steady despite the DeLay indictment. But even the party faithful are starting to question the GOP.

By Marcus Mabry
Newsweek
Updated: 1:03 a.m. ET Oct. 2, 2005
----------
The bad news is that Republicans’ support, while halting the president’s fall, even after the indictment of DeLay, isn’t resuscitating Bush’s political fortunes.
----------
For instance, a 49-percent plurality of Republicans says their party is “too close to oil companies” and a 53-percent majority says it’s “too close to big business.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9553533/site/newsweek/page/3/

Conservative Crackup
How the neocons have developed a political exit strategy.
By Howard Fineman
Newsweek
Updated: 2:17 p.m. ET Oct. 12, 2005

Oct. 12, 2005 - President George W. Bush may have no military exit strategy for Iraq, but the “neocons” who convinced him to go to war there have developed one of their own—a political one: Blame the Administration.
----------
But now all the constituent parts are—for various reasons—going their own way. Here's a checklist:

Religious conservatives
Corporate CEOs
Main Street: Smaller government deficit hawks
Isolationists
Neocons
Supply-siders - "This is the one faction that the president has yet to disappoint in a major way." He hasn’t raised taxes…yet.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9674425/site/newsweek/page/2/

Crossing the Cabal
Whatever the outcome of the Valerie Plame case, it says a lot about how dissent is taken in the White House. Plus, analyzing Bush’s low poll numbers.

By Richard Wolffe and Holly Bailey
Newsweek
Updated: 6:28 p.m. ET Oct. 19, 2005
----------
Those Plunging Polls

…But even if the numbers say little reliable about what will happen in next year’s midterm congressional elections, they speak volumes about the present political woes of the White House. Bush’s approval ratings have declined so sharply this year that he has lost most of his support among independents (who give him an approval rating of just 32 percent), even as he has held on to the vast majority of Republicans.

If the GOP is going to recover over the next year, its target must be those disillusioned independents. That’s a tough challenge given the state of gas prices. It’s even harder at a time when the White House is focused on rallying its conservative base to rescue Miers’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9756244/site/newsweek/

Widening Rift
With Republicans already battling each other, stem-cell research threatens to split the party further apart.

By Eleanor Clift
Newsweek
Updated: 6:09 p.m. ET Oct. 21, 2005

Oct. 21, 2005 - Conservatives are divided over the Iraq war, Katrina spending and Harriet Miers. They’re warring against each other in Washington and dragging down their party’s approval ratings. Now, the battle is spreading beyond the Beltway to Red State America, where business conservatives have had enough of the religious right’s hold on power and are openly challenging its views.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9776982/site/newsweek/

This article provides a good summary of stem-cell research in general, and ends stating: “That’s the outcome stem-cell advocates must achieve if America is going to reclaim its position as a leader in biotechnology.” -- An important point in itself.

 

[SOS2008]

After reading various posts in other threads, I thought I'd reiterate some of what I posted above (post #92), since it is appropriate to the topic of this thread...

There are a few trends we can see. One trend has been to blame congress the most. Bush seems to come out smelling like a rose time and again because of blind loyalty from his base. But who cares, because Bush is going buh-bye.

Dubya is done—he isn’t running for a third term people (and if he could, he’d lose). And ultimately, what will his legacy be? “…43 percent of Americans believe history will see George W. Bush as a “below average president;” 35 say average and only 19 percent say above average” - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9553533/site/newsweek/page/3/
(This 19 percent of the 40% base are the extremists that no one wants in their party anyway.)

So congress is to blame. Well for those who don’t know, congress is comprised of a Republican majority. While Bush is constantly excused for his poor performance, nonetheless the WH coattails have been frayed, so the RNC is having difficulty getting candidates to take the risk of running right now. True, another trend is that of short-term memory. But there will be an increase in DNC opposition, so during campaigns Republican hardball is going to be met with hardball, and all the dirt on the incumbents will actually be exposed/revisited--for a change (i.e., memory refreshers).

There will be a loss of Republican seats in congress. How much is debatable. IMO a Republican majority will remain, but the margin will be narrowed enough to prevent all-out power grabs such as we’ve witnessed in the last few years (thank goodness!). I’m an Independent who has been mobilized, and hopefully the margin will become very narrow because of other Americans like me who believe in checks and balances, and who have been appalled at the behavior of Bush, et al. –

“If the GOP is going to recover over the next year, its target must be those disillusioned independents. That’s a tough challenge given the state of gas prices. It’s even harder at a time when the White House is focused on rallying its conservative base to rescue Miers’s nomination to the Supreme Court.” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9756244/site/newsweek/page/2/

In the meantime, Republicans can’t even get along with one another. There is disagreement about the invasion of Iraq, Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers--and cronyism in general that led to mismanagement of Katrina, deficit spending is a big issue, illegal immigration/border security, and stem-cell research. If Bush raises taxes on the wealthy and/or big business (which needs to be done), this would result in more disenchantment of the base. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9674425/site/newsweek/page/2/ , http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9776982/site/newsweek/

I’m not going to over-estimate this. At the same time I like to see the optimism of conservative PF members (Russ, kat, Pengwuino, etc.) because that means under-estimation is even greater in the general population—which will be to the opposition’s advantage.

As for the presidential race in 2008 – The coattails are frayed, and the Bush base is not a majority (tends not to exceed 40% even in the best of times). That means anyone who was part of the Bush administration can forget it (e.g., Condi). Even Giuliani will be questionable from this perspective. Remember - "Will Giuliani Replace Cheney in ’04?" http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4065772 And remember speculation that he was interested in a cabinet-level position in the Bush administration? Though he is more moderate than McCain, I’ll remember this.

As for McCain, I’ll remember his support for the invasion of Iraq…and his slow half measures in regard to border security and disregard for American jobs in general.

 

[GENIERE]

… what America should do to gain the world's trust back and end the war.

Nothing,! The world is coming around quite nicely

Since his attention is diverted from Iraq, the odds of having a clearcut victory will diminish. He needs to focus his energy at home or he may lose both fronts

Since he has already won, “winning” is not relevant.

.

 

[Skyhunter]

Nothing,! The world is coming around quite nicely
Since he has already won, “winning” is not relevant.
.

I'm sorry, but I am having a little trouble finding your perspective here.

Nice post SOS. It does look to be a rather daunting task, especially since his favor has been falling, not gaining since this thread was started.

I am still amazed that anyone could vote for a Republican in 2006. Not that I could see many Republicans voting for Democrats. Might be a good year for the Libertarians.

Republicans control both the House and the Senate, and approval of Congress is lower than Bush's approval.

Will we see the "it's the other representatives, not mine" syndrome?

Or will the odor surrounding the entire leadership of the Republican party still smell when the incumbents come home to campaign for 2006?

 

[loseyourname]

Both of California's senators are already democratic. So is my House representative, although I don't know anything about her (I only moved here recently). This is from her bio:

As the Chair of the Democratic Caucus Task Force on Children and Families and the Ranking Member of the House Education Committee’s Subcommittee on Education Reform, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey is dedicated to giving working families the tools they need to take care of their children. Further, as a Senior Member on the House Science Committee's Subcommittee on Energy, Rep. Woolsey is working to ensure that renewable energy sources, energy efficiency and conservation are an integral part of our federal energy policy.

Anybody have any knowledge of this woman?

 

[GENIERE]

Anybody have any knowledge of this woman?

The tools probably are government grants for day care, paternal maternity leave... things that provide the government with a means to become the caretaker and mind molder of the child. After all, the parents are working to for the good of society and should not be subject to the tedium of raising a child. I confess to knowing nothing about the woman.

Some 10 years ago I spent a week (courtesy of my employer) at the Silverado Country Club in Napa Valley. I had a condo on the 12th hole. I think the area would be a great place to live and raise a family (if thay let you).

 

[Skyhunter]

Both of California's senators are already democratic. So is my House representative, although I don't know anything about her (I only moved here recently). This is from her bio:
Anybody have any knowledge of this woman?

Here is her website.
http://woolsey.house.gov/
She is one of the main proponents of an exit strategy for Iraq.

Woolsey Calls on Democrats & Republicans
to Plan Future of Iraq
September 8, 2005
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma) is calling on Members of Congress and the President to work together to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq, while helping the Iraqis regain control over their country and their future.

http://woolsey.house.gov/latestnews.asp?ARTICLE5110=44547

She is also the first welfare mother to be elected to congress.

Since she first took office in the House of Representatives in 1992, Rep. Woolsey has worked to make children, and their education, our nation's top priority. This commitment stems from her experience as a single mom on welfare. Thirty-five years ago, even though she was working, Rep. Woolsey was forced to go on public assistance to make ends meet while she raised her three small children. Eventually she worked her way off welfare, and today she is the first former welfare mom to serve in Congress.

http://www.woolseyforcongress.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=57

At least she has experiential knowledge when it comes to the issues she is most concerned about.

She also sponsored the House resolution 304 to urge the Chinese government to stop suppressing the Falun Gong.

On October 4th, 2004, the US House of Representatives unanimously passed H. Con. Res. 304 urging the Chinese Government to cease its oppression of Falun Gong practitioners in the U.S. and in China. Recently, a Clearharmony reporter interviewed Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, the sponsor of the resolution, and Mr Chris Daly, Council member of the City of San Francisco, who was himself once harassed by the Chinese Consulate.

http://www.clearharmony.net/articles/200412/23441.html

She opposed the creation of the DHS.

Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey has met the enemy, and it is us. To be more specific, it's the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Two years ago, Woolsey, a six-term Democrat who has represented Marin and Sonoma counties in the U.S. House of Representatives since 1992, opposed creation of an overarching federal homeland security department, saying the "attempt at governmental overhaul may take us too far down the wrong road, and may make us less safe."

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/sonoma/07.28.04/woolsey-0431.html

She also advocated that the boy scouts not discriminate against gays.

http://www.scoutingforall.org/cwoolsey.shtml

She received 72.7% of the vote last election, so chances are she will retain her seat.

 

[BobG]

Looks like Bush is trying to take step 2 towards winning back favor.

Step 1 was his response to Hurricane Rita and rebuilding the Gulf Coast and his emphasis on diversity on the US Supreme Court. The cost of his rebuilding effort brought some pressure from fiscal conservatives. The 'diversity' he delivered to the Supreme Court fell flat.

Step 2 seems to be the realization that he just can't fight so many fronts at once. Sometimes a member has to be sacrificed for the good of the team (slogan stolen from a demotivational poster of raft shooting the rapids with one poor member who'd fallen overboard). Miers is the first cut. The leak investigation will bring some more cuts (there's a lot folks in the White House screaming "High side, High side!" ).

It will be interesting to see which fight Bush is making these sacrifices for. If your support from the religious right is trashing him the same way they trashed Frist for stepping out of line, will his next nominee be geared towards winning back their support or will he looking for a new base of supporters? If the second, which fight would a more moderate base support?

Considering the position of many Democrats' position on Iraq (they don't like the war in Iraq, but also realize withdrawing too quickly would be a disaster), his focus might be restricted to the war in Iraq. Iraq is the big issue Bush will be judged on in history. Everything else might be up for compromise.

 

[pattylou]

If the second, which fight would a more moderate base support?.

Alternative, renewable energy and an emphasis on the environment.

Everyone, everyone wants it.

My prediction is that if a candidate can put forth a *real* plan to re-unite the country, on issues that are broadly of concern - like energy independence (which in the long term *has* to involve renewables) - that they will win in a landslide.