He's Not Invincible

Blitz

Hopeful
Forum Member
Jan 6, 2002
7,540
46
48
58
North of Titletown AKA Boston
HE'S NOT INVINCIBLE

By - Laura Ingraham

The Bushies have already raised $35 million dollars! The President's approval ratings are still hovering around 60 percent! Our forces have already captured most of the thugs in its Iraqi deck of "most wanted" cards! The "l" word is beginning to reverberate through political circles--i.e., it will be Bush in a landslide in 2004. This comes from many of the same chatterers who were saying that John McCain presented a serious threat to Bush in the 2000 primaries.

Perhaps this presidential election will be a snoozer. Perhaps the President will run away with the thing--taking even the electoral prizes of California and New York. But right now that prospect seems far from certain. And there is a chance that President Bush will find himself with a base that is unmotivated, which spells catastrophe for any candidate.

Let's look at where we are. Yes, the country trusts this president with our military. Yes, it appreciates his aggressive stance in the war on terror. Yes, it thinks he's doing the right thing on taxes. But along with all those positives, there are undeniable negatives:

1. Unemployment is disturbingly high. (It may be a "lagging indicator" but tell that to the millions of people coast-to-coast who are out of work)
2. The war in Iraq is "over" except that we have a soldier a day getting killed over there.
3. Democrats, as we see with the Howard Dean boomlet, are energized, infuriated, and have the media on their side.

Even considering these stormclouds, the President still has a lot going for him--including a lackluster Democrat field. But this only means that it is critical for him to make absolutely certain that his base--the conservatives--are really, really happy. I am here to report to you that there is trouble in River City.

Why? Consider the response President--no, candidate--George Bush gave recently when a reporter pressed him on whether he supported amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage: "I don't know if it's necessary yet. Let's let the lawyers look at the full ramifications of the recent Supreme Court hearing. What I do support is the notion that marriage is between a man and a woman."

On the heels on one of the most outrageous Supreme Court decision in decades, which established a Constitutional right to homosexual sodomy, the President fumbled. He punted. He referenced his lawyers. Not good.

The salient point here is not about gay rights per se, it is that President Bush's comments indicated that the Administration increasingly views its conservative supporters as a political embarrassment, a group whose expectations need to be managed. This is a colossal mistake. Without the support of millions of conservatives who showed up to vote for him in 2000, George Bush would be spending a lot more time clearing brush in Crawford. We all know how his father's political calculation to raise taxes sat with conservatives--we never forgave him. (One could almost hear the conversation Bush the elder had with himself at the time--"Gee, I hate to break my 'no new taxes pledge,' but even if I bail on that, where are conservative going to go? Vote for that Clinton fellow?! Nah.")

After eight years of the Clinton follies, conservatives were convinced that George W. Bush was not his father's son--the ghost of '92 had scared sense into him about offending "the base." On the issue of tax cuts, President Bush certainly learned. He has brilliantly backed the Democrats into a corner, enacting a tax cut that no one, even a year ago, thought had a chance. But conservatism cannot survive on tax cuts alone.

For weeks, conservatives from across the country have been filling the email box of my radio show with doubts about where this Administration is taking us. On the size of the government, one listner from Seattle asked, "How is it that the number of employees at the Homeland Security Department is greater than the aggregate of all the agencies that were folded into it?" A law student in Boston wrote: "Our troops are still getting shot at by thugs and Saddam loyalists in Iraq, and now we're about to nation-build in Liberia?!!" Scores of others wrote to complain about the Administration's $400 billion "triangulation" strategy on prescription drug coverage for seniors--a move that Dick Morris desribed as "brilliantly Clintonian." There is also a constant cry about the President's anemic efforts to curb illegal immigration. Last month, the Bush Treasury Department rammed through regulations that permit banks to accept "Mexican consular ID cards" as legal identification. (Mexican officials issue these cards by the thousands every week to illegals living here.)

But it was the President's dodge on the marriage amendment that seemed to touch off a mini-revolt in the heartland. Even people (like me) who think state laws against sodomy are idiotic were upset. In the words of one fed-up stay-at-home mom in Kansas: "What's the point of doing the grassroots work for conservative candidates if this is what we're getting?"

Some of this frustration is no doubt overblown. And there is some truth to the statement that no politician will ever be conservative enough for the hardcore types. Nevertheless, as smart and politically savvy as Karl Rove, Ken Mehlman and other top Bush strategists are, they need to remember that conservatives need more than lip service to volunteer to do the nitty-gritty work that wins elections. Knocking on doors, passing our pamphlets, answering phones, and manning voter registration desks for Republican candidates is the sort of work done by people who believe that America is about more than tax cuts and the war on terror.

They believe that the Supreme Court's decision upholding the use of race to promote diversity in universities is an insult to the Constitution and our goal of a color-blind society. (The Administration quietly praised the Court's holding.) They believe that while all Americans should be treated with dignity and decency, marriage is a sacred institution in the eyes of God. They believe that we should use our superior technology and appropriate manpower to keep our borders secure.

The President won the support of many across the country precisely because he defied his elite roots in his style and substance. Unlike Al Gore, he was a regular guy who just happened to go to Yale, Harvard and be raised in prominent, wealthy political family.

Now, more than ever, conservatives need to hear from that regular guy--strong, sensible, and unafraid of the scorn of the elites. The big tent philosophy is a smart one--but the tent cannot stay up for long without the proper grounding stakes.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
But then we find out today his VP. Let Bush tell a big nono. In fact a lie about Iraqs nuke program. Not really a bad thing for Bush. But it does show judgement for his VP was not the best. but many in the party have not been fans of Cheney to start with. It could cost a few votes. But you are correct. Jobs if anything will cost him. Seems clear on most other things. Even the questions of why Iraq have dropped off. But the funny thing is as Iraq gets less attention. Bush's rating go down. Might he start another little something just to keep those number up. We shall see.
 

SixFive

bonswa
Forum Member
Mar 12, 2001
18,737
242
63
54
BG, KY, USA
good article then, a good article now. Reread the title, ts, she says he's not invincible even with an anemic democratic field and a then 60% approval rating.
 

SixFive

bonswa
Forum Member
Mar 12, 2001
18,737
242
63
54
BG, KY, USA
gotcha. Still, I'm not convinced the Democrats will carry any states other than Massachusetts and California even with the low approval rating. Face it, Kerry is too weak and too left to win. If the Democratic party had elected a strong centrist candidate, they would have beaten W. Kerry, who's voting record is even left of his mate, Teddy Kennedy, can not win this election.
 

TossingSalads

Registered User
Forum Member
Apr 24, 2004
472
0
0
58
48 states to 2? I think He'll get Ohio, Nj New York, Pa, most of new england. I expect four more years of W also.
Kerry will get more votes though.
 

SixFive

bonswa
Forum Member
Mar 12, 2001
18,737
242
63
54
BG, KY, USA
TossingSalads said:
48 states to 2? I think He'll get Ohio, Nj New York, Pa, most of new england. I expect four more years of W also.
Kerry will get more votes though.

might be right, just thought of those 2 liberal states off the top of my head.
 

TossingSalads

Registered User
Forum Member
Apr 24, 2004
472
0
0
58
Most states will fall the same way they did last go round. IMO
Ohio can go either way. Florida also. Jersey and Pa should be close too. Cheers
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,476
151
63
Bowling Green Ky
Its kind of hard to predict and I anticipate it to be close regardless.

While I would not vote for Kerry there are some factors that I personally consider a plus if he gets in.

We now have conservative adm spending like a liberal one. I don't think for a minute Kerry would tighten the purse string but do feel the conservative congress would keep him in check better.

I do not feel we should have tax cuts while in war on terror and I think Kerry would cinch that.

--and believe it or not Kerry is one of the biggest pro business democrats there is if you consider what he has done vs what he says..

However these items are not NEAR enough to sway me but I try to look on optomistic side of all possibilties and these are only few I could find.
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
history has shown that an encumbent(sp?) either wins big or loses big.

but of course it doesn't mean that this election wont be close.
 
Last edited:

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
it

it

could have been dean or wesley clark...i,personally,am fairly pleased that kerry got the nomination.....considering the alternatives....

i just wish he`d distance himself a little from teddy...

i hear that edwards is the likely v.p. candidate...to help him a bit in the south....

it will be interesting to see how the clinton`s react to that one....if kerry picks edwards and wins,and gets re-elected,it`s a strong possibility that edwards will be the dem`s candidate in 2012.....he`s young...handsome....

that leaves hilary with her thumb stuffed firmly up her giggy....it will be curious to see how enthusiastically bill and hil support a kerry/edwards ticket....
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I say right around End August the chit will really get started. There are some good points that can help Bush by then. More folks working. Iraq trun over goes well and and about 35000 troops are told to come home. Gas back at $1.60. Interest up only .50. Stocks back up about 4% 5%. He wins in a land slide. All the other BS will get hidden by these. Howeve if much of the above does not happen. Well then you will here about Schools and Health care and Gas prices and so on. Then we got a tight race. But please who ever does win. Win with more votes then the other guy. No more Supeme Court Ruleings.
 

Blitz

Hopeful
Forum Member
Jan 6, 2002
7,540
46
48
58
North of Titletown AKA Boston
Re: it

Re: it

gardenweasel said:

that leaves hilary with her thumb stuffed firmly up her giggy....it will be curious to see how enthusiastically bill and hil support a kerry/edwards ticket....

Look for them to sabotage Kerry campaign. For starters look at Clinton releasing his book right before Dems convention...
 

LEROY TIREBITER

Registered User
Forum Member
May 19, 2004
25
0
0
DJV, if you think gas will be at 1.6/gal by August, you're nuts.
I paid 2.37 this morning, 52.37 to fill my tank and it's May in
SoCal, will be paying 2.57 by August, (if lucky), gas companies
fly WAY ABOVE politics, they OWN POLITICS. They could give a
rat's ass who is in office, THEY OWN THE OFFICE.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top