News What can Bush do to gain back favor?

[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.

 

[Anttech]

that they will win in a landslide.

go for it then Pattylou, I'm behind you 100% ;-)

 

[SOS2008]

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.

People are asking why we don't have an Apollo type program for alternative energy. I agree, though I would say it should have been started years ago, so in this sense it isn't Bush's fault. But that he has blocked efforts regarding the environment, and supports big business, specifically oil, it makes him all the more culpable.

 

[pattylou]

I don't think it's bush's fault that we're not there yet -

I do think Kerry could have won in spades on the environment and he blew it. He had softball environmental questions thrown to him in the debates and he blew them off. his environmental record is outstanding.

Gore's is too. The difference between Kerry and gore is that Gore is very outspoken about it. He speaks at the Sierra club, and so on. Kerry may have wanted to distance himself from the green image that Gore had... (?)

I think people are ready for this. We have come into this context where people at least *think* we're killing for oil, whether or not that's part of the issue - And rising gas prices, and incredible hurricanes - all of which *may* (or may not) be red herrings in the anthropogenic environmental argument.

But, people are on edge about these things and a candidate could run on energy independence and gentler treatment of the environment.

Anttech - You're crazy. :) But I thiink someone from one of the parties will latch onto this. I'd vote republican if I thought the guy would make a difference on these issues.

 

[SOS2008]

Bush’s popularity hits new low
Poll: Majority of Americans question president’s integrity
By Richard Morin and Dan Balz
Washington post
Updated: 10:04 a.m. ET Nov. 4, 2005
----------
On almost every key measure of presidential character and performance, the survey found that Bush has never been less popular with the American people.
----------
According to the survey, 52 percent say the charges against Libby signal the presence of deeper ethical wrongdoing in the administration. Half believe White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, the president's top political hand, also did something wrong in the case -- about 6 in 10 say Rove should resign his position.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9917012/

 

[Gokul43201]

More recent polls reflect dismal numbers for Bush.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=anbMHAfJN5jM&refer=top_world_news

Bush's Approval Rating Falls to Lowest Yet, AP/Ipsos Poll Shows

Nov. 4 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. President George W. Bush's approval rating dropped to its lowest level ever, according to an Associated Press/Ipsos poll conducted after a key White house aide was indicted and another withdrew as Supreme Court nominee.

Only 37 percent of Americans surveyed Oct. 31 to Nov. 2 said they approved of the way Bush is handling his job as president, according to a summary of results published on the Ipsos Web site. That's down from 39 percent at the beginning of October and the lowest since the AP/Ipsos poll was first taken in Dec. 2003.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/?feed=TopNews&article=UPI-1-20051103-08272800-bc-us-bushpoll.xml

Bush's job approval falls to 35 percent

NEW YORK, Nov. 3 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush's job approval rating has reached a low of 35 percent in a CBS News poll published Thursday.

The network cited the U.S. service personnel death toll surpassing 2,000 in Iraq, an indictment in the leak of a CIA agent's name, the aborted Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers and the hobbled federal response to Hurricane Katrina as reasons for the plunge in support, which also showed 57 percent of those questioned disapproving of Bush's leadership.

The only recent president lower at this point in his second term was Richard Nixon.

 

[Astronuc]

People are asking why we don't have an Apollo type program for alternative energy. I agree, though I would say it should have been started years ago, so in this sense it isn't Bush's fault. But that he has blocked efforts regarding the environment, and supports big business, specifically oil, it makes him all the more culpable.

Why do we need energy independence when the oil companies and Bush's buddies are making record profits?

So what if 40+ million Americans can't afford health insurance?

So what if the Federal debt keeps increasing?

So what if record numbers of people live in poverty?

So what Rumsfelf makes huge capital gains from Tamiflu?

Rumsfeld's growing stake in Tamiflu

NEW YORK (Fortune) - The prospect of a bird flu outbreak may be panicking people around the globe, but it's proving to be very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences, the California biotech company that owns the rights to Tamiflu, the influenza remedy that's now the most-sought after drug in the world.

Rumsfeld served as Gilead (Research)'s chairman from 1997 until he joined the Bush administration in 2001, and he still holds a Gilead stake valued at between $5 million and $25 million, according to federal financial disclosures filed by Rumsfeld.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/31/news/newsmakers/fortune_rumsfeld/?source=aol_quote

So what if the war in Iraq lasts indefinitely and there is no strategy but 'stay the course'?

What have I left out?

 

[Astronuc]

Maureen Dowd, NY Times, November 5, 2005
Fashioning Deadly Fiascos

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Men are simply not biologically suited to hold higher office. The Bush administration has proved that once and for all.

These guys can't be bothered to run the country. They are too obsessed with frivolous stuff, like fashion and whether they look fat. They are catty, sometimes even sabotaging their closest friends. They are deceitful minxes and malicious gossips.

And heaven knows they're bad at math. Otherwise, W. would realize that a 60 percent disapproval rating, or worse, means that most Americans would like some fresh blood in the administration. It's appalling to see ringleaders of the incompetent, mendacious crew who rushed into Iraq but not New Orleans getting big promotions and posh consulting jobs.

Let's first consider the astonishing new cache of Brownie e-mail released by the Congressional panel investigating the heartbreaking Katrina non-response.

Batting away the frantic warnings of death and doom in New Orleans, bubbleheaded Brownie boasted of his style sense, replying to a staffer who told him his outfit looked "fabulous" on TV: "I got it at Nordstrom."

By Jove, I think she's got it!

By Sept. 4, with disaster apartheid in full view, Brownie was getting e-mail advice from his press secretary: "You just need to look more hardworking," Sharon Worthy wrote the FEMA Fashionista. "ROLL UP THE SLEEVES!"

It may seem unfathomable that W. has kept Brownie, one of the biggest boobs in U.S. history, on the federal payroll as a $148,000-a-year consultant.

But President Bush may be empathetic to Brownie's concerns about looking good. Obsessed with losing the seven pounds he'd gained around his waist, W. was so focused on getting back his hourglass figure that his staff had to compile an emergency DVD of Katrina news stories before he could be dragged away from biking.

. . . .

The former Powell chief of staff, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who often verbalizes what Mr. Powell does not say because the ex-secretary of state does not want to be in a public catfight with the cabal, charged on NPR that the cabal issued directives that led to the abuse of prisoners by U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"It was clear to me," he said, "that there was a visible audit trail from the vice president's office through the secretary of defense down to the commanders in the field that in carefully couched terms - I'll give you that - that to a soldier in the field meant two things: we're not getting enough good intelligence and you need to get that evidence - and, oh, by the way, here's some ways you probably can get it."

Colonel Wilkerson called David Addington, the shadowy Cheney counsel who has been promoted to Scooter's chief of staff job, "a staunch advocate of allowing the president in his capacity as commander in chief to deviate from the Geneva Conventions."

Dowd concludes with

Colonel Wilkerson said that there was an N.S.C. memo that made a compelling argument for a large number of troops being necessary in Iraq, "and to this day, I don't know whether that memorandum ever got to the president of the United States."

Women are affected by hormones only at times. Vice's hormones rage every day.

 

[Gokul43201]

A nice picture :

http://www.pollkatz.homestead.com/files/pollkatzmainGRAPHICS_8911_image001.gif

 

[Informal Logic]

A nice picture :

http://www.pollkatz.homestead.com/files/pollkatzmainGRAPHICS_8911_image001.gif

It is hard to make out the details, but I assume the peak is after 9-11. Too bad there was not more time elapse prior to that to provide a baseline - Because approval prior to 9-11 looks pretty low, and this would be America's real perception of Bush. It really makes one question all the more how he was elected in 2000.

 

[Skyhunter]

It is hard to make out the details, but I assume the peak is after 9-11. Too bad there was not more time elapse prior to that to provide a baseline - Because approval prior to 9-11 looks pretty low, and this would be America's real perception of Bush. It really makes one question all the more how he was elected in 2000.

If memory serves me correctly he was appointed, not elected.

 

[SOS2008]

Washington Post-ABC News poll shows

Bush's Popularity Reaches New Low
58 Percent in Poll Question His Integrity

By Richard Morin and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, November 4, 2005; Page A01

A clear majority -- 55 percent -- now says the administration deliberately misled the country in making its case for war with Iraq...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/03/AR2005110301685_2.html

And the latest on SC nomination, Alito?

 

[McGyver]

A Solution to Bush's Quagmire: Get Out the Hatchet

Bush's problems are now really coming to a head, but where he fails, is that he continues to back people in his administration who have failed he and the U.S. so miserably.

VP aid Libby is done, and it appears the White House has cut him loose - then VP Chenney goes and picks an equally culpable aid in this investigation. My prediction is that either Chenney will have to go, or Carl Rove. Still, both could be pressured to resign. Chenney is mainly responsible for the Iraq war fiasco, whereas Rove is partly intermingled in Fitzpatrick's investigation, some pre-war intelligence failures, and in the many rediculous efforts by the extreme religious right to form a new U.S. union. Bush will not be able to withstand the heat from both fiascos. So, it may be a "softer" blow to the administration if Chenney resigned, I mean of course, because of his ailing health. That's a good way to save face, and he better do it before the Libby trial gets underway in February.

As for Rove, if the Democratic Senate can muster up enough courage, and with support from the news media, they might push Rove into a corner. Bush then would be left with no VP, and a wounded senior aid.

Bush must start looking for a new VP, top advisors, and even a new Secretary of Defense to take over the failed Iraq war. Fellow Republicans in the House and Senate, who are up for re-election next year, will not stand with his administration. It's time for a house-cleaning. Get out the hatchet!

 

[Informal Logic]

Bush's problems are now really coming to a head, but where he fails, is that he continues to back people in his administration who have failed he and the U.S. so miserably.
VP aid Libby is done, and it appears the White House has cut him loose - then VP Chenney goes and picks an equally culpable aid in this investigation. My prediction is that either Chenney will have to go, or Carl Rove. Still, both could be pressured to resign. Chenney is mainly responsible for the Iraq war fiasco, whereas Rove is partly intermingled in Fitzpatrick's investigation, some pre-war intelligence failures, and in the many rediculous efforts by the extreme religious right to form a new U.S. union. Bush will not be able to withstand the heat from both fiascos. So, it may be a "softer" blow to the administration if Chenney resigned, I mean of course, because of his ailing health. That's a good way to save face, and he better do it before the Libby trial gets underway in February.
As for Rove, if the Democratic Senate can muster up enough courage, and with support from the news media, they might push Rove into a corner. Bush then would be left with no VP, and a wounded senior aid.
Bush must start looking for a new VP, top advisors, and even a new Secretary of Defense to take over the failed Iraq war. Fellow Republicans in the House and Senate, who are up for re-election next year, will not stand with his administration. It's time for a house-cleaning. Get out the hatchet!

Several Republicans have been distancing themselves, most recently Rick Santorum. Rats jumping off a sinking ship.

 

[BobG]

Bush seems to have reverted to the one thing he and Rove are good at - attack dog campaigning. He seems to be hoping another campaign against Kerry will revive his presidency. He quoted Kerry in his Veteran's Day speech, saying Kerry backed the Iraqi invasion - "because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hand is a threat and a grave threat to our security."

That probably means three years of Swift Boat Vet ads trashing Kerry's military record. Actually, it's probably more likely we'll see three years of different, but similar, ads against anyone who stands up to Bush. It wouldn't surprise me to see someone come out of the woodwork to start trashing McCain if he keeps up being such a pain to Bush and the religious right.

If you rule out any change of direction, which Bush has apparently done, it's probably the smartest move left to him. If he makes radical changes in his agenda, he loses his current political base and has no guarantee he'll be able to generate a more moderate base. In fact, even if a radical change in agenda would prove successful in the long run, it would almost be guaranteed to push his poll numbers down into the twenties before it started rising again. By time he did establish a new base, there wouldn't be time to do anything with it.

About the best possible scenario left is if Bush's poll ratings stay so low that moderate Republican Congressmen quit fearing the repercussions of overriding Presidential vetoes. We could live through three years of a weak presidency.

 

[Skyhunter]

About the best possible scenario left is if Bush's poll ratings stay so low that moderate Republican Congressmen quit fearing the repercussions of overriding Presidential vetoes. We could live through three years of a weak presidency.

There are signs of them doing just that. I was slightly stunned when the budget vote was delayed. The leadership in the house is was not able force all their members into line.

In the past the Delay leadership used a stick and carrot. The stick being personal and political destruction. The carrot being, once enough threatened congress persons agreed to vote their way, they would let the others vote their conscience.

 

[BobG]

There are signs of them doing just that. I was slightly stunned when the budget vote was delayed. The leadership in the house is was not able force all their members into line.
In the past the Delay leadership used a stick and carrot. The stick being personal and political destruction. The carrot being, once enough threatened congress persons agreed to vote their way, they would let the others vote their conscience.

That just sounds so economical.

"If you oppose me on this I'll beat you with the stick."

"Do I get anything if I help you?"

"Yeah, once in awhile I'll beat someone else with the stick instead."

"Do I get to watch?"

"Yeah, but it'll cost you extra. Think you could actually campaign for this instead of just not opposing it?"

 

[SOS2008]

Since Bush supporters admire him for sticking to his guns (though recent polls show some are now referring to this as "stubborn"), he can't appear to flip-flop on positions, in particular he must stick with his base on things like SC nominations.

Where he has gone wrong—especially most recently—is being loyal to people in his administration. He should have shown leadership and replaced individuals causing damage. But the #1 problem is and will remain the war in Iraq, which he has little control over. Of course, since he started the mess, I have no sympathy if it proves to be his ultimate destruction.

Autumn of Discontent
The latest NEWSWEEK poll shows serious political trouble for President Bush.
WEB EXCLUSIVE
By Marcus Mabry
Newsweek
Updated: 2:00 p.m. ET Nov. 12, 2005

...President George W. Bush is sinking deeper and deeper into political trouble, according to the latest NEWSWEEK poll. Only 36 percent of Americans approve of the job he is doing as president, and an astounding 68 percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the direction of the country—the highest in Bush’s presidency. But that’s not the worst of it for the 43rd president of the United States, a leader who rode comfortably to reelection just a year ago. Half of all Americans now believe he’s not “honest and ethical.”
----------
The president can take some solace in the fact that 42 percent of Americans believe he is honest and ethical. Only 29 percent believe that Vice President Dick Cheney is. And more than a quarter of Republicans, 26 percent, believe the vice president is not honest and ethical.
----------
In a Veterans Day address on Friday he accused critics of his Iraq policies of sending “the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America’s will.” But Democrats aren’t the only ones questioning the administration’s Iraq policies—almost 2 in 3 Americans (65 percent) disapprove of the president’s handling of Iraq.

And that links directly to the credibility issue. Fifty-two percent of Americans believe Cheney “deliberately misused or manipulated pre-war intelligence about Iraq’s nuclear capabilities in order to build support for war,” including 22 percent of Republicans and 54 percent of independents.

Most worrisome for the White House: the base seems to be cracking. When asked whether anyone in the administration “acted unethically” in the case involving the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame’s name, a 54-percent majority of Americans said they did—and 30 percent of Republicans said they did. And 45 percent of Americans believe someone in the “Bush administration broke the law and acted criminally”—including 22 percent of Republicans.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10013594/site/newsweek/

In the meantime (and while the above poll was conducted), the tactics Bush used in his Veteran’s Day speech were pitiful, and his delivery was even more pitiful.

 

[SOS2008]

About those poll numbers...and an increase to a whopping 42 percent...how did that happen?

Associated Press
Updated: 3:54 p.m. ET Dec. 9, 2005
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10399472/

WASHINGTON - President Bush’s improved standing with whites, men, Catholics and other core supporters has been a key factor in pushing his job approval rating up to 42 percent.

Whites, men, and Catholics. Hmm... here's a quote that comes to mind:

"It's the oppressors, Christians, Republicans and Nazis." - Big Gay Al, Southpark

Now, gas prices have eased, and Bush has been barnstorming the country to tout a stronger economy and claim progress in Iraq.

...Bush declared on Monday that “the best days are yet to come for the American economy.”

Well I should hope so...sometime in the future (after 2008?).

On Iraq, he’s halfway through a series of four speeches outlining — in the words of a huge banner behind him at one event — the administration’s “Plan for Victory” in Iraq.

This plan for victory...what exactly would that be?

Well his speech here in Arizona on border security and illegal entry went over like a lead balloon.

 

[Astronuc]

Well I have been thinking about the poor guy, Rigoberto Alpizar, who was shot by a federal marshal because he claimed to have a bomb. He mentally ill and his wife was apparently trying to tell them that Alpizar was mentally ill and had not taken meds.

According to what I have heard, the authorities claim this a textbook case, and of course, the marshals behaved appropriately. However, this guy was running off the plane and up the jet way. Presumably if he had a bomb and was a terrorist, he would have blown up the plane or waited after takeoff. Duh!

Besides, the bag had passed the security check point. Then they off-loaded the plane and had all the other passengers put their hands over their heads. They inspected the luggage and apparently blew up two pieces!

I think the marshals over-reacted, and this is just one more example of the brutality that is the hallmark of the Bush administration, particularly in foreign policy. Now it appears that even US citizens are vulnerable.

 

[Skyhunter]

Well I have been thinking about the poor guy, Rigoberto Alpizar, who was shot by a federal marshal because he claimed to have a bomb. He mentally ill and his wife was apparently trying to tell them that Alpizar was mentally ill and had not taken meds.
According to what I have heard, the authorities claim this a textbook case, and of course, the marshals behaved appropriately. However, this guy was running off the plane and up the jet way. Presumably if he had a bomb and was a terrorist, he would have blown up the plane or waited after takeoff. Duh!
Besides, the bag had passed the security check point. Then they off-loaded the plane and had all the other passengers put their hands over their heads. They inspected the luggage and apparently blew up two pieces!
I think the marshals over-reacted, and this is just one more example of the brutality that is the hallmark of the Bush administration, particularly in foreign policy. Now it appears that even US citizens are vulnerable.

There is at least one witness who claims that he never heard the word bomb.

I don't think they needed to use deadly force with the guy," says John McAlhany, a 44-year-old construction worker from Sebastian, Fla. "He was getting off the plane." McAlhany also maintains that Alpizar never mentioned having a bomb.

"I never heard the word 'bomb' on the plane," McAlhany told TIME in a telephone interview. "I never heard the word bomb until the FBI asked me did you hear the word bomb. That is ridiculous." Even the authorities didn't come out and say bomb, McAlhany says. "They asked, 'Did you hear anything about the b-word?'" he says. "That's what they called it."

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1138965,00.html

And it seems like everything else that happens under the "leadership" of this administration the air marshalls program is no better than FEMA.

“Our air marshal guidelines currently in place address suitable standards appropriate for law enforcement officers,” Adams said.

But others with troubled backgrounds have been hired, the report notes. Specifically, 104 former prison guards turned air marshals were found to be involved in 155 separate cases of misconduct while on their prison jobs. All those air marshals currently hold top secret clearances and are on active duty.

Those 155 incidents include “offenses such as falling asleep on duty, verbally abusing a female prison official, breach of security, physical abuse of an inmate, inappropriate relationship with an inmate’s wife, and misuse of government property and credit cards,” the report says, citing records from the Internal Affairs division of the Bureau of Prisons.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5870501/

I am starting to wonder if the Bush administration is a plot to destroy America.

Just because I am paranoid, that doesn't mean they are not out to get me!