• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

AS DUBYA SINKS, AL & HILL SCHEME

LeadMagnet

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,348
0
0
Article

September 9, 2003 -- HERE'S what I see happening in the 2004 presidential race: Al Gore is watching President Bush. Hillary Clinton is watching Gore. Bush is watching Hillary and the Democrats are watching Dean.
Everything clear? Here's the long version:

Bush's poll numbers continue to tank. The Zogby poll has his job approval at 45 percent, a drop of seven points since August and 19 since last year. (Zogby's methodology generally understates job approval, but the downward trend is unmistakable). The Fox News/Opinion Dynamic poll shows that Bush would get only 50 percent of the vote in a trial heat against Gore. It would be a rerun of 2000 - and we'd still be waiting up all night to learn the count in Florida.

But the Democrats know that the president has an ace up his sleeve: Howard Dean. This ultra-liberal, who Bush could defeat with his eyes closed, is racing into the lead in the Democratic field.

The latest Boston Globe poll shows the former Vermont governor beating John Kerry in New Hampshire, a state each must win to survive, by 38 percent to 26 percent. (And with 54 percent of former McCain voters backing Dean.) Richard Gephardt, who must win in Iowa, and John Edwards, who must win South Carolina, also face Dean surges in those key states.

So Bush can hope Dean's surge continues and presents a McGovernesque target for him in November. But Democrats are slowly waking up to the possibility that they may have the '04 election in their grasp, only to throw it away on the Dean candidacy. This is generating tremendous intra-party pressure on Gore and Hillary to run.

My guess is that Hillary would be just as happy to see Dean win the nomination and get slaughtered in November by Bush. That would make W a two-term president despite having no real base of popularity, and open the way for her to run in 2008. Since Dean has no chance of beating Bush, she needn't worry that an incumbent Democratic president would bar her way until 2012, when she'll be 65.



But Gore may suddenly see a real possibility of a straight run for the nomination and a general-election win. A review of the donor lists of the Democratic contenders shows that most of the former vice president's money people are still sitting out the race. Were he to run, Gore would force out most of the other Democrats and likely make quick work of Dean. In November, Gore would enter the election as the favorite against Bush.

But Hillary would be most unhappy to see Gore get the nod. Since Al would be a good bet to win, her nightmare scenario of a Bush defeat and no open field in 2008 would be coming to pass. So should Gore begin to make a move, Hillary will likely get into the race to pre-empt him.

The White House must realize the temptation the president's low ratings pose for Gore and Hillary, and understands that if Bush's numbers keep sinking the pressure for one or both of these heavyweights to run may prove irresistible.

So Karl Rove et al are scrambling to raise Bush's numbers in the crucial next 40 to 50 days, during which Hillary and Gore must make their move or watch the filing deadlines for the primaries pass them by.

Hence the speech to the nation on Sunday, the TV movie about Bush on the same night and the focus on the 9/11 anniversary, all designed to raise the president's polling and keep the big guns out of the Democratic presidential sweepstakes.

Why is Bush falling so badly? The superficial reasons are the Iraq casualties, the failure to find WMDs and the continuing inability to round up Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. But the real reason is that terror is receding as an issue, largely due to Bush's success.

The solution for Bush is to put terrorism back on the front burner by high profile and aggressive action against Iran and/or North Korea. It's not necessary to wag the dog, but Bush should wag his tongue and raise the profile of these two remaining threats to our security.
Article
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,939
6
81
You mean since terrorism isn't such an issue people are beginning to see how messed up the US has become in most other areas, and that their country needs to be sorted out, and that Bush might not be able to do it?
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Welcome back to pre-9/11 approval ratings, where bush was the lowest ever for a u.s. president!
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Though everyone knows everything around here (from what they read in 5 minutes after a Google/NYT search), I thought I would just point out Carter's approval ratings for a brief spell:

4/14-17/78 Gallup 40
4/28-5/1/78 Gallup 41
5/05-08/78 Gallup 41
5/19-22/78 Gallup 43
6/02-05/78 Gallup 44
6/16-19/78 Gallup 42
7/07-10/78 Gallup 40
7/21-24/78 Gallup 39
8/04-07/78 Gallup 39
8/11-14/78 Gallup 40
8/18-21/78 Gallup 43
9/08-11/78 Gallup 42
9/15-18/78 Gallup 45

Clinton has been to 45, perhaps lower...many presidents have been lower than Bush; in fact, if 45% approve of his job and vote, get ready for four more years...FOUR MORE YEARS!
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
6/01-04/79 Gallup 29
6/22-25/79 Gallup 29
6/29-7/2/79 Gallup 28
7/13-16/79 Gallup 29
8/03-06/79 Gallup 32
8/10-13/79 Gallup 33
8/17-20/79 Gallup 32
9/07-10/79 Gallup 30
9/28-10/1/79 Gallup 33
10/05-08/79 Gallup 29
10/12-15/79 Gallup 31
11/02-05/79 Gallup 32
11/16-19/79 Gallup 38
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
3/07-10/80 Gallup 43
3/28-31/80 Gallup 39
4/11-14/80 Gallup 39
5/02-05/80 Gallup 43
5/16-19/80 Gallup 38
5/30-6/2/80 Gallup 38
6/13-16/80 Gallup 32
6/27-30/80 Gallup 31
7/11-14/80 Gallup 33
8/15-18/80 Gallup 32
9/12-15/80 Gallup 37
11/21-24/80 Gallup 31
12/05-08/80 Gallup 34
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Though everyone knows everything around here (from what they read in 5 minutes after a Google/NYT search), I thought I would just point out Carter's approval ratings for a brief spell:

4/14-17/78 Gallup 40
4/28-5/1/78 Gallup 41
5/05-08/78 Gallup 41
5/19-22/78 Gallup 43
6/02-05/78 Gallup 44
6/16-19/78 Gallup 42
7/07-10/78 Gallup 40
7/21-24/78 Gallup 39
8/04-07/78 Gallup 39
8/11-14/78 Gallup 40
8/18-21/78 Gallup 43
9/08-11/78 Gallup 42
9/15-18/78 Gallup 45

Clinton has been to 45, perhaps lower...many presidents have been lower than Bush; in fact, if 45% approve of his job and vote, get ready for four more years...FOUR MORE YEARS!

Care to post Bush Sr's approval ratings?
 

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
The solution for Bush is to put terrorism back on the front burner by high profile and aggressive action against Iran and/or North Korea. It's not necessary to wag the dog, but Bush should wag his tongue and raise the profile of these two remaining threats to our security.
It would be inefficient, from a military-industrial complex profitablity perspective, so begin another destruction/reconstruction effort at this juncture.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,626
5,923
126
Originally posted by: JellyBaby
The solution for Bush is to put terrorism back on the front burner by high profile and aggressive action against Iran and/or North Korea. It's not necessary to wag the dog, but Bush should wag his tongue and raise the profile of these two remaining threats to our security.
It would be inefficient, from a military-industrial complex profitablity perspective, so begin another destruction/reconstruction effort at this juncture.
while thats true, it didn't say do that. it said to talk about doing that.
 

Pennstate

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 1999
3,211
0
0
Jellybaby: I haven't been around much. but did you drastically change your political views since the last election?
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,352
9
0
When something goes bad, blame on someone else.

When something goes good, take the credit for it.
 

JellyBaby

Diamond Member
Apr 21, 2000
9,159
1
81
Originally posted by: Pennstate
Jellybaby: I haven't been around much. but did you drastically change your political views since the last election?
Yes. Wisdom and with it insight always bring change, I hope in my case for the positive. There was a time when I barely bothered to skim a post written by you, SuperTool, Tripleshot etc...the more liberal/progressive crowd. That was a mistake and I was wrong. I'm no longer blocked by categorization, party affiliation. And the sad part was I actually thought I was a free thinker back then. I hope that madness never returns.

But also things changed from under me. For instance, I once thought I understood the republican party platform well and agreed with much of it. Bush shattered that understanding by going exactly opposite of his party's platform and his campaign promises. Likewise his fellow Rs were complacent of that violation. That triggered an Awakening. Combine that with what I saw in Iraq and Bush Inc's modus operandi in D.C. (e.g. hiding the formal signing of raising of the national debt ceiling...twice) and I grew mad suspicious.

I next began expanding my political intake from centrist, libertarian and conservative journalism to the one corner I always neglected, the liberal/democrat/progressive worldview by forcing myself to read Bill Press, Ellen Ratner (she's still a tough read!) and the like. Must consume all worldviews...must assimilate and decide for myself. I aborted FOX news (and now actually nearly all TV news). Started to read and re-read the views of the "other" side here in the forums.

I vowed never to box myself into a political party corner again. It blinds you to truth, no matter which party you pick. Oddly, I knew better. Early on in life I refused to be boxed into a belief system. Should have learned the lesson better then I suppose. Oh well, kick self and move on.

So, yes, I have changed. I can watch Hillary on TV without the hair rising on the back of my neck. Not sure if I'm a better person but at least I'm free.
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
3/07-10/80 Gallup 43
3/28-31/80 Gallup 39
4/11-14/80 Gallup 39
5/02-05/80 Gallup 43
5/16-19/80 Gallup 38
5/30-6/2/80 Gallup 38
6/13-16/80 Gallup 32
6/27-30/80 Gallup 31
7/11-14/80 Gallup 33
8/15-18/80 Gallup 32
9/12-15/80 Gallup 37
11/21-24/80 Gallup 31
12/05-08/80 Gallup 34

No offense but how in the world does this pertain to the subject at hand? Great - carter had bad ratings...what have you proved?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,626
5,923
126
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
3/07-10/80 Gallup 43
3/28-31/80 Gallup 39
4/11-14/80 Gallup 39
5/02-05/80 Gallup 43
5/16-19/80 Gallup 38
5/30-6/2/80 Gallup 38
6/13-16/80 Gallup 32
6/27-30/80 Gallup 31
7/11-14/80 Gallup 33
8/15-18/80 Gallup 32
9/12-15/80 Gallup 37
11/21-24/80 Gallup 31
12/05-08/80 Gallup 34

No offense but how in the world does this pertain to the subject at hand? Great - carter had bad ratings...what have you proved?
Welcome back to pre-9/11 approval ratings, where bush was the lowest ever for a u.s. president!
 

sMiLeYz

Platinum Member
Feb 3, 2003
2,696
0
76
Bush's a goner, the republicans know it... the democrats know it. We all know it.

Unless Bush manages to steal another election, we're all spared another travesty.

This is the absolutely most criminal administration since the other republican... Nixon.
 

rockyct

Diamond Member
Jun 23, 2001
6,656
32
91
First off, I don't think Dean is a goner. I think if the economy doesn't improve, the deficit grows bigger, no WMD are found, and troops in Iraq are still getting killed, people will begin to want a changing of the guards. However, Dean still needs to smooth out his rough edge with moderate voters.

I don't think Gore will run. I think he realizes that he bowed out too early and wish he didn't, but he will not go back on his decision. I wish he would run because I think he is the only one who truly knows how to run the country. After all, he was VP for eight years. I've read a couple speeches by him recently, and he really makes a lot of sense.
 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: magomago

No offense but how in the world does this pertain to the subject at hand? Great - carter had bad ratings...what have you proved?
...read the previous posts and thou shall find the answer.
 

308nato

Platinum Member
Feb 10, 2002
2,674
0
0
At this point in Reagan's first term, his numbers were in the low 40's. I believe he was re-elected......it was a squeaker though.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY