Bush Re-Election Sunnier Than Father's

Newsday ^ | January 23, 2004, 2:41 PM EST | NANCY BENAC, AP

[A_Niceguy_in_CA]

WASHINGTON -- A political snapshot of America taken from the White House window couldn't look more different for President Bush than what his father saw from the same vantage on a cold January day 12 years ago.

In hard statistics and a harder-to-define sense of how the country is doing, today's view is one Bush's father could only have envied as he entered the re-election year of 1992. And, likewise, the public's impression of this President Bush is much kinder than was the assessment of his father at the same point in his presidency.

[Map Kernow]

Yet you think the TRUE amnesty plans offered by the Dem candidates are better?

So you think you can read my mind, too? When did I say the Democrats' plans were "better"? We're talking about Bush's plan, aren't we?

[Caipirabob]

I agree with you to a point, but then again, 35% of the general population and some 15% of all dead people voted for Gore in 2000. I think there's a concern here.

[Solson]

We're talking about a CHOICE. You have intimated the CHOICE you will make will be based on the Immigration Issue. If that's the case, what will your CHOICE be? Bush and his immigration plan or the Dem with theirs?

[CMClay]

The only thing that will save Bush now is the capture of Osama.
The Dems will turn-out and vote for anyone of the dwarves, such is their hatred of Bush.

[gdani]

I don't think the Dems will California. It's just a hunch but I think Bush takes California.

If the Dems lose California, the election is over & it doesn't matter what happens in the smaller battleground states.

While I know that Michigan & Ohio are not a lock for either party, I assumed in my brief analysis that Illinois typicaly goes Dem but that's just a guess.

[Map Kernow]

I think they're bogus too, if what we're using cheap immigrant labor for is to mow our lawns and care for our children while we're working 80 hours a week to keep that Lexus. I'm talking about essential labor in California's farming industry. It isn't a matter of figuring out a way to cut costs of delivering goods and services. When I start seeing white high school kids spending their summers on tomato harvestors in the fields around my town, rather than hanging out at the mall, then we can talk about running those who now do that job out of the country.

"Essential labor"? There's no such thing as "essential labor," otherwise African-Americans working industrial and professional jobs in the Northeast, Midwest, and California would still be picking cotton in Mississippi. Labor costs aren't an excuse for undermining the law and our national polity anyway.

Your hysteria about "Norte California" is precisely the kind of twisted perspective I've come to expect from the extremist Pat Buchanan right. You base your political perspective on some fear of a great horde of little brown people overrunning your community. Get a grip.

Ah, here come the insults and abuse! Packed a lot in there, buddy, dincha? Never a discussion of the Bush amnesty proposal without the GOP hacks accusing their opponents of "twisted perspectives," "extremism," and---oh, yes!---"racism."

Well, here's my pact with you, fellow Californian. You don't give a chinga what I think. And I don't give a mierda what you say. And we'll both see if the disaffection of all these people on the "extremist right" who just happened to punch the card for your boy Bush last time around adds up to un monton de frijoles on Election Day.

[Solson]

IL will go Dem as will Wisconsin. MN will go GOP for the first time in a long time.

There will be battleground states but...if California looks like a potential battleground state the Dems will be forced to pour money into CA. Any chance the GOP has to engage in a long, expensive battleground state, the better off we are. We've got more $$ than the Dems. The more places the Dems have to spend their dollars, the more diffuse the effort, the better off we are.

[Map Kernow]

We're talking about a CHOICE. You have intimated the CHOICE you will make will be based on the Immigration Issue. If that's the case, what will your CHOICE be? Bush and his immigration plan or the Dem with theirs?

I choose neither! Why should I be forced into a Hobson's choice on the sovereignty and future of my own country, just because partisans like you say I have to???

[IMRight]

Bush wins Florida, Texas, Penn & much of the South & smaller states...The Dem wins California, New York, Illinois(?), Mass & some other NE states...Battleground states = Ohio, Michigan & West Virginia where the economy continues to spiral downward. OH & MI both full of electoral votes.

If Bush wins Floridaand Pennsylvania it doesn't matter what happens in OH/MI. The race is already over. I don't think there is a Democratic road map to victory without one of those states (unless they run a southern candidate who can bring in 3-5 states that right now don't look "in play".

[NordP]

"I live in California, in a small farming community in the Sacramento Valley. Over half the residents of our town are migrant workers and their families. The flood of immigrants coming into our state is of concern to me, but I also see the reality that if we rounded them all up and threw them across the border, the ag industry in California would be decimated. I'm not thrilled with Bush's immigration proposal, but I'm also not going to kick him to the side of the road over one or two issues.

If Bush loses, it will be more the fault of strident narrowminded "conservatives" who blow one or two issues way out of proportion compared to the bigger picture. Fortunately, this "base" you say is being driven away amounts to a very small proportion of the electorate."

I also live in CA. I think you're post is stated so well, that I had to re-post it.

Hubby and I watched the State of the Union address at a La Jolla restaurant/bar--upstairs, with many of the top leaders of the Republican party in San Dieg. We spoke with a gentleman there that gave many copies of his book on the illegal immigrant situation and his ideas to ease this disturbing situation, to the White House. He said many of his ideas were included in the Bush proposal. One of his ideas was a sort of ATM account for the migrant worker, where the worker could spend a portion of his money earned in the US, and the most and remainder would be set up in an account in his home country--accessable only when IN his home country. I thought this was pretty innovative, and if this idea IS included in the Bush proposal, and people like me don't know of it.....there's a serious "sales" problem in the message of what this proposal really says. We should all be better informed of its contents.

In general, Republicans still need help in the "selling" and "marketing" part of their excellent message to their fellow Americans. We're making progress, but we're still light years away from great.

NordP

[NordP]

Dieg = Diego

oooops

[NordP]

MN = GOP --- yeah!!!!!

My homeland becomes enlightened to what they should have been all along. We believe in personal responsibility, working hard, and faith based answers to struggles to help our fellow man.

okay, so I'm thawing out in CA ;-)

[DrDeb]

"Bush is ticking off his base on two fronts: 1) out-of-control deficit spending; and 2) a radical amnesty plan to legalize millions of illegal immigrants and to hugely increase immigration levels."


TWO QUESTIONS:

1.) Who comprises the President's base? Libertarians? Bucchannites? Members of the Consitution Party? Republicans?

If you answered Republicans, you would be correct! In last week's ABCNews/WashingtonPost Poll, 93% of Republicans indicated that they APPROVE of the President's job performance!

2.) If, as you claim, the "base" disapproves of the President's performance relative to the two issues you identify, on what issues (policy or performance) does the base agree?

--WAR ON TERROR? (THE overriding issue!)
--NATIONAL SECURITY?
--ECONOMIC PRO-GROWTH AGENDA? (a comprehensive pro-marriage, pro-small business plan that includes MUCH more than simple tax relief)
--PRO-LIFE INITIATIVES? (e.g., Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, Partial Birth Abortion ban, support for Unborn Victims of Violence Act, funding for crisis pregnancy centers, adoption programs, and on and on and on)
--CHARACTER/LEADERSHIP/FAITH?
--and so on, and so on, and so on

I'll answer by citing the following comments from the President's BASE ('real' people NOT policy wonks/ideological demagogues -- and no, I'm not saying you qualify as the latter):


"President Bush enjoyed a friendly crowd at Roswell’s Convention and Civic Center (NM) on Thursday as he hammered home points from this week’s State of the Union address.

Curry County Sheriff Roger Hatcher was among the supporters.

“I’m glad we have a president with backbone, who’s not afraid to make difficult decisions, regardless of how it affects his chances for re-election,”

The people of the world trust the word of America,” he said to whoops and hollers from the crowd.

Sheriff Hatcher summarized Bush’s speech as “excellent,” and Undersheriff Doug Bowman agreed with him.

“I’m grateful for his respect for law enforcement and the military. We’ve got a president who stands behind us 110 percent,” Bowman said.

Jordan Strebeck, a Clovis High School senior and student body president, also made the trip to Roswell. He said for someone who is interested in politics, Bush’s speech was “one of the coolest things I’ve ever seen.”

“I think he really cares about America and the people of America,” he added.

Strebeck’s friend Jason Seefeld, also a CHS senior, said Bush’s stands on the war on terror and home-front security impressed him.

“It was a once-in-a lifetime experience for us to come here and hear what he had to say,” Seefeld said.

Roswell resident Dottie Edwards said this was only the second time a sitting president has visited Roswell. Ronald Reagan visited the city in 1984. She said what she liked best about Bush’s speech was his honesty about the issues."

http://cnjonline.com/engine.pl?station=clovis&template=storyfull.html&id=4010

[Owen]

Just to be sure everyone important is aware of reality, a factoid:

GW Bush's domestic discretionary spending as a percentage of GDP is LOWER in the same years of his presidency than that of Ronald Reagan. This has been managed despite a recession, which of course, eroded GDP and made that ratio harder to achieve.

Repeat, GW Bush's domestic discretionary spending as a percentage of GDP is LOWER in the same years of his presidency than that of RR. In both cases, and indeed, as a multi decade norm, the number floats around between 3 and 4%. And note also that this achievement was accomplished DESPITE about $20 billion in Homeland Security expenditures being categorized as "domestic discretionary".

The explosion of talk about this is because the 3.5% number is up from Clinton's, and thus looks like some horrid increase, but Clinton had the dot com silliness inflating the GDP, which lowered his ratio.

The truth is GW Bush's number in this regard is lower than RR's. He hasn't done too bad a job, while stimulating his way out of a recession and trying to keep cities from being glowing craters.

Source: CBO archives

[NordP]

YEAH DrDeb!!!

You Go Girl!!!

--and she ALWAYS has the data to prove it! ;-)

[NordP]

Excellent points, as well Owen!

[eyespysomething]

turn out turn out turn out

[Solson]

Fine choose neither. Sit at home for all I care. It just goes to show how willing folks are to throw away the baby with the bath water.

Do you know what the difference between a pragmatist and an idealist is? A pragmatist actually gets something done. An idealist will choose "neither", sit at home, and whine about why nothing is being done.

No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism.
Winston Churchill

When we start deceiving ourselves into thinking not that we want something or need something, not that it is a pragmatic necessity for us to have it, but that it is a moral imperative that we have it, then is when we join the fashionable madmen, and then is when the thin whine of hysteria is heard in the land, and then is when we are in bad trouble.
Joan Didion

[Lily4Jesus]

CA.????....this time we will make sure it goes for GWB. It has been decreed and it shall be established.
Lily in CA.

[savedbygrace]

It seems to me that in January and February of 1991, GHWB was enjoying 80 - 90% polling numbers because of the success of Desert Storm.