Twenty-one Reasons Why Bush Will Win

ElectionProjection.com ^ | 2/7/04 | Scott Elliot

[NYC Republican]

1. No more drunk driving lightning bolts

Just four days before the election, muckrakers uncovered a dirty little secret on their GOP rival. Twenty-four years earlier, George W. Bush was arrested for drunk driving. To make matters worse, he answered no when a reporter asked if he'd ever been arrested. It was the kind of bombshell that would have ruined his shot at the White House, except for the lead in the polls he had at the time. The effect of the report was evident later in exit polls. They indicated that a majority of people who made up their minds within three days of the election voted for Al Gore. Normally, undecideds break overwhelmingly to the candidate from the party out of the White House. In addition, an unknown number of voters who had been attracted to Bush's image of integrity were motivated to stay home. Without this perfectly-timed political hand grenade, Bush would have won the election with room to spare, and the blatant partisanship of the Supreme Court (of Florida, that is) would have remained local news. In all likelihood, Bush won't face a similar devastating revelation this year.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Bush defeated the incumbent party in a time of peace and prosperity

In 2000, Al Gore enjoyed a huge advantage going into the election season. He was the sitting vice president during a time when the country was enjoying an extended period of peace and prosperity. Even under those circumstances, the American people thought enough of George W. Bush to elect him anyway. All things being equal, Bush will benefit from being in the incumbent party this time around. (I can hear Democrats mumbling something about Gore's poor campaign strategy losing the election. Maybe that contributed, but, nevertheless, Bush did possess a certain degree of electability. Imagine John Kerry..er..or not.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Democratic get-out-the-vote

Special interests serving the Democratic party developed an intimidating get-out-the-vote machine during the 90's. That process culminated in an heroic effort in 2000. The result? Dubya took the best punch well-heeled civil rights activists and unions had to offer and still came out on top. Those Democratic special interests will be hard-pressed to match that performance and even less likely to exceed it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. National Security and the War on Terror

The United States of America was forever changed on that day in September when all of us were so violently ripped from of our mirage of security. Never again will peace be thought of as a given in American life. We are a nation at war. It is a war that will continue for a long time against a ruthless, unprincipled adversary bent on the merciless taking of civiflian life. They have stated their desire to kill us, each and every one, simply because we are Americans. In such times, we are instinctively drawn to leaders who show the determination to proactively confront and conquer the threats we face. Most of us understand that a co-existent relationship with these enemies cannot be negotiated; they must be subdued through absolute victory in the theater of war. Bush understands this, and Americans know it. I hesitate to bring politics into the War on Terror, but the facts are obvious. Our President and his party in general have shown themselves much more willing to implement the iron-fisted policies necessary to vanquish this insidious foe. Speaking loudly, while leaving the big stick in the closet, is not the trademark of this administration when it comes to terrorism. There can be no denying that George W. Bush is serious about actively protecting our people and our nation. The vast majority of voters, even those who may disagree with the path down which that action is taking us, take comfort, consiously or not, in the protection our military provides under the firm hand of our Commander-in-Chief. This sense of protection through vigilance will be a huge factor this November in polling booths across the country.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. The perfect timing of the economic cycle

The recession of 2000 started very early in Bush's presidency. So early, in fact, that it is absurd to suggest Bush's policies had anything to do with it. The downturn was compounded by the disastrous economic effects of September 11. Bush understood that America needed to pour on the fuel to keep our economic engine from stalling. His tax cuts and immediate tax rebates provided a boost that helped avert a deeper, longer recession. The economy has since turned the corner and is picking up steam. If the current trends continue, and they should, by November the economic outlook held by the electorate should be much improved. And Bush will benefit considerably at the ballot box.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. The perfect timing of the national conventions

This is an excellent point brought up by PoliPundit last November. Here's the meat of those thoughts (I paraphrase just a little): "The Democrats made a major blunder in the 2004 presidential race by choosing to hold their national convention on July 26 in Boston. The GOP will be holding its convention in the first week of September. I could go on endlessly about why this helps the GOP, but here are four concise reasons: 1. Bush will be able to continue spending his Primary money until September and use his general election money from September to November. The Democratic candidate, however, will be out of money by July, because of a tough Primary, and then have to make his general election funds last from July to November. This exaggerates Bush's already crushing money advantage. 2. 9/11 will be a few days after the GOP convention. 3. By holding the Democratic convention on July 26, the Democrats risk losing the post-convention bounce in the polls by election day. 4. The summer Olympics are between the two conventions and will suck the air out of the DNC message."

The two months between September's Republican National Convention and Election Day will be a great time to be Republican. I can't wait!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. The collective weakness of the Democratic hopefuls.

The weakness of this crop of Democratic contenders has been well documented. Suffice it to say that whoever emerges with the opporunity to face Bush will be no Al Gore, as if that were a boast.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. Same Sex marriage

With the rulings handed down by the Supreme Court of Massachusetts and a law in Ohio banning gay marriage, we are on a collision course with this issue that will force it into the political spotlight this year. The country is largely opposed to gay marriage, generally ambivalent toward civil unions, and mostly against a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as a joining of one man with one woman. That is the national consensus. However, if we look deeper into the intensity of each group on these issues, we see a much different picture. A few supporters of gay marriage are adamant in their views. They will mostly vote against Bush regardless of his stance, notwithstanding log cabin Republicans. However, most people who support gay marriages and civil unions, and thus oppose an amendment, do not hold that position with a great degree of fervor. By and large, they will not be motivated to take their votes away from Bush or to make sure they get out and vote against him when they would otherwise stay home. It's simply not that big an issue with them. It is an entirely different thing for a large portion of those who support the amendment. Their opposition to changing the traditional definition of marriage runs deep and strong. It is a big deal to them. Bush's stand on this issue will directly create votes for him among those whose intense feelings on this issue will overwhelm their general indifference to the political process.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. Republican get-out-the-vote

Possibly the most significant development in the American election process since 2000 is the unbelievable strides the GOP has made in terms of volunteerism and organization. Once a domain dominated by Democratic special interests, get-out-the-vote is now practically a wash, and GOP operatives are frenetically working to increase the breadth and depth of grass-roots support structures all over the country. This is an amazing turnaround from 2000. It, alone, will turn many a close state into a comfortable Bush victory, while moving some comfortable Gore states within striking distance for the President.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. Florida is much more Republican now

A startling event took place in 2002. It was startling both in its circumstances and in the lack of focus it received. That event was the Florida gubernatorial election. What happened there, when taken in the context of the voting debacle two years earlier, was truly phenomenal. I'll recap it for you:

In 2002, Terry McAuliffe pledged that Jeb Bush, the president's own brother, would be defeated in his re-election bid. In fact, the DNC made the Florida governor's race their number one priority of the 2002 election cycle. Moreover, only two years removed from the spectacle of 2000, emotions and energy should have been be running extremely high among Democrats. Did we see massive Democratic turnout? Did Terry's threats come true, for once? Nope! What transpired was not a humiliating GOP defeat, but a Bush-brother victory by a count that exceeded Jeb's first election margin. He won by an amazing 13 points! It was a complete and utter repudiation of the revenge factor and clearly showed the strength of the GOP in that state. Without Florida as an obvious pickup target, the Democrats' options to gain ground shrink considerably.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11. Redistricting

President Bush has gained a small yet concrete advantage heading into the elections this year. Red states in 2000 netted Bush 271 electoral votes. This year those same states would give him 278. In other words, he could lose a state like New Hampshire, Nevada or West Virginia and win anyway. Even losing a larger state such as Louisiana or Colorado would produce a 269-269 tie.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12. The Base is solid

Despite his forays into fiscal liberalism - Medicare, immigration, education - the President maintains phenomenal support among Republicans. A poll in late January by the American Research Group found only 10% of GOPers disapprove of the job he is doing. Eighty-six percent approve. In addition, the vocal displeasure at his aforementioned transgressions has apparently not fallen on deaf ears. Recently he has offered peace offerings to the GOP faithful, such as a spending freeze on non-defense spending. Finally, his rock-solid conservative stands on abortion, judicial appointments, taxes, gay marriage, and National Security are sure to bring out a sizeable elephant stampede in November.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. Proven leadership

Can we trust a privileged businessman who has served but 6 years in elected office to handle the affairs of the most powerful nation on earth? In 2000, voters put their faith in an untested George W Bush. Four years later, his courageous, principled, and steadfast leadership have led this country through some of its most trying times. Even those who dislike and disagree with President Bush would be hard-pressed to deny the resolve of his leadership. He provided and continues to provide a steady hand when we need it most. Voters will feel eminently more confident to put their trust in him again this year.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. New Hampshire is more Republican

Florida and New Hampshire were the two states that Ralph Nader's candidacy lost for Al Gore. I've already addressed the current situation in Florida. New Hampshires is not much different. Voters there have now elected two Republican senators, a Republican governor, and two Republican representatives. The GOP has a 3 to 1 advantage in the state senate and better than a 2 to 1 advantage in the state house. A Democratic victory here will be quite a feat, indeed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15. Minnesota and Iowa are more Republican

Pew research conducted a nationwide poll last summer to measure changes in party affiliation since the tragedy of September 11. Minnesota and Iowa have been trending Republican of late, and these shifts were quantified in that poll. They present yet another headache for McAuliffe's bunch. Now they have to row against the current in states that Al Gore won.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16. Governor Schwarzenegger

California's fiscal health is the inevitable result of a steady diet of liberal policies. Last year, voters in this very blue state decided to switch chefs between meals. They settled on a Republican. In fact, over 60% of them voted for a GOP candidate. Does this mean 60% will vote for Bush? Not a chance. However, with this clear rejection of liberal economics and with the structural advantage that comes with control of the Governor's mansion, Republicans have a shot at competing for the biggest electoral prize in the nation. Regardless of the eventual winner, a competitive GOP in California would require Democrats to funnel precious resources to protect their most valuable bastion.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

17. Ohio's social conservatism

Since Florida and New Hampshire are no longer the targets they once were for the DNC, Ohio becomes the challenge of choice. On the surface, Bush's narrow victory there in 2000 would give Democrats hope of taking it from the GOP in 2004. However, the political winds are blowing in the GOP's favor this year. Ohio's recent passage of a ban on gay marriage highlights their socially conservative lean. The impending battle in the gay marriage debate will solidify and motivate social conservatives in this crucial state, resulting in a more difficult obstacle for the Democrats to overcome.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18. The Deaniacs' pending revolt

Former Vermont governor Howard Dean has been a veritable political highlight reel. Never before in my memory has a candidate followed a path similar to the one of this eccentric politician. In the race for the Democratic nomination, it has been thoroughly entertaining to see this man so flamboyantly hurtle himself to the front of the pack only to relegate himself to also-ran status through clumsy mis-steps and childish outbursts, all in a period of a few months. But, even though he's finished as a viable choice, his candidacy will have far-reaching effects on the election in November. What Dean did was to identify and add fuel to a smoldering fire within a segment of the Democratic party. These liberal Bush-haters haven't broken their engagement with him. They understand that he "feels their anger" - the same anger that will now compel them vote for a third party candidate rather than betray their man by voting for the victorious Democratic foe. This group won't be huge, but it will be enough to give Bush another advantage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

19. Democratic experts still think Dubya's dumb

I had to add this one. Bush has made a career out of having his opponents "misunderestimate" him. They show no signs of realizing that they really aren't dealing with a moron. How many more times will the Democrats ponder, "How did he do that?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20. Giuliani's campaigning

As I've mentioned above, national security will be paramount in voters' minds this election season. After Bush, no one personifies the triumph of American resolve in the aftermath of September 11 more than Rudy Giuliani. In the time since, he has shown himself to be a willing advocate for Bush and other Republicans on the campaign trail. His active presence can only help Bush's standing in November.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21. Democratic filibusters of Bush's judicial nominees

An issue that, if used wisely, can be very effective in wooing conservatives and moderates alike, is the heavy-handed, partisan tactics of Democratic senators. Never before have a president's judicial nominees been subjected to filibusters with the reckless abandon employed by this group of liberal lawmakers. Democrats have charted virgin territory in their quest to stall Bush's vision for a balanced, non-activist federal judiciary. The GOP has an opportunity to wield this obstructionist track record to attract more moderate voters and win a larger portion of the hispanic vote - read this.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm sure there are more reasons for optimism. I'm also sure my counterparts on the left could come up with their own list of reasons for them to be hopeful. But the point has been made: President Bush is going to be one tough hombre to dislodge from that thar White House. When you Bushies out there are discouraged by the spin and disappointed by the polls, just read this list again and stop your fretting. But don't stop donating and volunteering. That will play a most critical part in making this view become a reality. He is certainly not assured of re-election, but, with our continued support and hard work, all signs point to a second term for George W. Bush, the 43rd President of the United States.

[Henrietta]

"A little infighting and your version of the "proper" punishment and we'll all suffer. I'll admire your great backbone while I watch our world collapse around us, more babies will die and our boys overseas will be in greater danger but WOW is Your backbone HUGE!!!!"

Yeah, I guess we shouldn't demand that Republicans hold true to conservative principles, should we? We should just be glad that they have that R after their name, and just vote for them, no matter what they say or do...after all, they're Republicans! /sarcasm

Gutless Republicans like you make the libs squeal with delight; it means Republicans can act like Dems and still get your vote.

[Lael]

Get a new job, I did. We are only debating unemployment because of all the weenies on this site complaining.

I'm not talking about a personal situation...but commonly expressed attitudes among people I interact with daily.

Against Dean, the 21 points would be valid...against Kerry [Kohn], they don't count!!

[1stFreedom]

>>Dignity is subjective as are our opinions, fallible or not economists deal with fact.

Economist deal with fact and theory.

>>You are a commodity, the CEO is a commodity, unless you own your own business, in which case your employees are a commodity.

That's a very sad view.

>>No touchy feely, peace love good time rock and roll philosophy changes that

No hard line, business is a religion, man-is-a-commodity philosophy changes the human dignity.

The idea that man is a commodity is itself a philisophical opinion. It's roots lie in a tarnished concept of mankind, the purpose of man, and the lust for money.

[185JHP]

63%! Good on 'em!

[SMGFan]

number 11 should be "reapportionment" of congressional seats not "redistricting".

[xp38]

I quickly skimmed through the thread and I may be wrong but there is another factor that hasn't been brought up. Namely a trial of Saddam Hussein. This could work both ways but I imagine if it is conducted before the election and widespread coverage is given to his attrocities and mass murder it could have the potential to elevate Bush in the eyes of the electorate to grant a landslide in the election. It would be the trial of the still young century.

[jstolarczyk]

Man, as a being is not a commodity, man as a worker is a commodity and has been throughout recorded history.

[1stFreedom]

>>Man, as a being is not a commodity, man as a worker is a commodity and has been throughout recorded history.

Man is not inseperable from his being, even as a worker.

Man as an individual being is deserving of respect and consideration regardless of his employment status or the relation he has to his superiers.

[Iron Matron]

You tell me how I'm supposed to stand up for those who won't stand up for me and I'll pass it along to those who are grumbling around me at work and at play.


+++

Believe me, I know where you are speaking from - sorry about how it's been going. But Havoc, this has happened in many industries. In 1998, thousands of jobs in states such as Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming and Louisiana were lost in the oil industries - whole families were destroyed.

And you know what? The rest of The United States did not care - not as long as they got their good clean air and satisfied environmental wackos. The govermnet has made everyones jobs some sort of special interest. - It is done to divide us.

President Bush is a good man, he does not try to please the polls, rather he tries to do what is best for the USA. Hang in there, things can get better - our voices can be heard, but not if we fall into despair.

If we despair instead of keeping our voices heard (however small we think they are) then the enemy wins.

All the best. Seriously.

[Iron Matron]

This should say: (what a blooper!)

And you know what? The rest of The United States did not care - not as long as they got their CHEAP GASOLINEand good clean air and satisfied

environmental wackos < ENVIRONUT SARCASM

[petercooper]

All these reasons don't mean squat to people whose jobs have been outsourced overseas.

I'm tired of hearing from the liberal media that all the unemployed will be out in droves and be voting W out. Go out and re-train and get a job. Get into a field that is growing. Learn a trade. Get yourself more marketable. And take a pt job or 2 or 3 in the meantime. Jeesh

[jstolarczyk]

I am hardly a SIC. Yes I am military and yes I support Bush. Because:

1. Partial Birth Abortion ban will appear before the Supreme Court soon and I want an Administration that will fight for it.
2. I want teachers to teach and stop forcing their values on children, especially Christian children often the focus of criticism. I want an Administration that will fight the "Exclusion Clause" being redefined and used against Christians.
3. I could care less about what an individual does in private. However even in my little town there have been conflicts with the school board over gay issues being endorsed in the High School. I want an administration that will fight to protect marriage.
4. I want a President the will appoint constructionist judges on the Supreme Court, not liberal activist judges.
5. I want an Administration that will continue to push military reforms.
6. I want terrorism stopped, and I prefer to fight them outside of my state. I want a President willing to stand-up to the French not one related to them.
7. I want lower taxes
9. I am tired of PC and I am tired of having history rewritten. Since the DEMS lost power they have stopped trying to rewrite the Reagan years or make George Washington a evil slave owner.
10. I want a President willing to stand up to the UN.
11. I do not want to be subjected to the World Criminal Court.
12. I want a President that opposes NGOs having influence in this country.
13. I do not want Kyoto ratified.
14. I want China to not invade Taiwan. I want a President that the Chinese view with caution, not one they feel they are in bed with.
15. I want a Strong President of conviction, character and strong faith.
16. I want a President that is for growth and will stand-up to Unions if they are in the way.
17. I want this country to remain the last major industrial nation that encourages faith vice European secularism, therefore I want a President with a strong faith in God.
18. I want a President to stand-up to the green nuts that in some cases commit terrorist acts in this country.
I do not agree with all Bush does, but I know Kerry will not do or represent any of the above.
I am asking allot of Bush. So you can stick the your; you only support Bush because you are Military attitude in your "ditty bag". By in large those in harms way do support this President. Funny, they have more to lose than you, yet they support him and you don't.

[1stFreedom]

>>Go out and re-train and get a job.

It's not as simple as you put it. Given a persons age, experience, etc, retraining may not do anything for them.

>>Get into a field that is growing. Learn a trade. Get yourself more marketable. And take a pt job or 2 or 3 in the meantime. Jeesh

Many of the fields require years of training. How can one go to school and pay the mortgage payments, child support, etc? It's very easy to say such things but in reality it's not so simple.

However, I would agree that it's a good idea to do what you suggest. But it's easier said than done.

(BTW, working 3 minimum wage jobs won't pay the rent where I live).

[petercooper]

nobody ever said life was easy or fair

[1stFreedom]

>>nobody ever said life was easy or fair

True, but that's not the issue.

[Henrietta]

"So you can stick the your; you only support Bush because you are Military attitude in your "ditty bag"."

How eloquent!

"By in large those in harms way do support this President. Funny, they have more to lose than you, yet they support him and you don't."

I think every citizen has a lot to lose when their party refuses to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States. You are not somehow "anointed" because of your military service, and your service does not somehow make your opionion more worthy or less worthy than mine.

I thought it interesting that you want lower taxes, and you list that as one of your reasons for voting for Bush. Pray tell how massively increased govt spending results in lower taxes...I'm sure we'd all enjoy hearing your version of that!

[Henrietta]

This article sums up my reasons for my disappointment with Bush...

THE DEFINITION OF INSANITY

By Mary Starrett
February 7, 2004

NewsWithViews.com

...is repeating the same behavior and expecting different results. We must be certifiable because that's what we did in 2000 and it appears that's what we'll be doing again in 2004.

Republicans have controlled both the executive and legislative branches of government for most of Bush's last four years. That's the first time the Grand Old Party's been in charge to that degree for almost 50 years. You'd think that would be a slam-dunk for our side. No such luck. In the last four years we've watched as First Amendment, Second Amendment and Fourth Amendment guarantees have slowly been eroded.

We wanted to make sure the carnage of abortion stopped - so we voted for a Republican. The killing continues.

We voted for a Republican because we wanted a reigning-in of federal spending. We now have the most bloated federal budget in the history of the Republic. No longer the party of fiscal discipline, the R's have become de facto pig farmers with all the pork projects they've funded. That used to be something we pinned on the D's.

We voted for a Republican because we wanted better schools for our children. Instead we got the most intrusive federal program to date in a scheme called "No Child Left (Alone) Behind".

Yes, the GOP had a wonderful opportunity to get us back on track. They blew it.

President Bush's patently un-Constitutional Medicare prescription entitlement debacle is one program even the Democrats would have had a hard time getting away with. To make matters worse, YOU, my friend are paying, with your hard-earned tax dollars, over $12.5 million for 30 second TV commercials "explaining" the "benefit" to older Americans. This is nothing but a shameless election year ploy to get you to think the president, in all his altruism has you covered on the medicine front. By the by, just WHERE in the Constitution does it say the federal government has the authority to take your money and then redistribute it to pay for drugs that, more often than not, make people sicker than they were before they started taking them?

During the last administration when the government was divided we saw less damage done to the country in terms of liberties lost. Hard to believe we can say that of what went on during the Clinton administration.

Today on CNN president Bush spoke of "bringing democracy and freedom" to the people of Iraq. I found that odd. When Bush had the opportunity to promote "democracy and freedom" for the free-Chinese in Taiwan he sided with the brutal regime in Beijing and told the Taiwanese to stand down in their efforts at free elections. The regime he defended at the expense of the tiny island was the same one that threatened to lob missiles at Los Angeles a few years back and the same one that first held a US military jet hostage, then dismantled it looking for spy secrets.

Nice going, GW.

It may be stating the obvious, but we had more checks on this out of control animal our government has become when the R's were the opposition party. By the way, for those who think you have no choice come November, remember the definition of insanity once again. If you repeat the same behavior (voting for Bush) you'll continue to get what you've gotten: Government from the Gulag whereby Patriot Acts and Homeland Security agencies strip us of liberty in a most disquieting way.

A recent poll on WorldNetDaily.com asked readers if they'd vote for Judge Roy Moore should he run as a third party candidate against Bush. What is there to talk about? A man who would give up prominence and defy a federal court for Christian principle (which is what this Republic was founded on) would be a de-luxe president in my mind.

My guess is the judge won't run- not to send a message to Bush- or for any other reason. That's why I'm voting for the Constitution Party candidate instead of Bush.

The moral imperative says I can not cast a vote for a de facto pro-abortion, anti-gun globalist when a man of sound principle like Michael Peroutka is running.(www.peroutka2004.com) I agree with him on every issue. I had a chance to interview Mr. Peroutka on a radio show I did yesterday and I was mightily encouraged. Not because I think he'll win. He won't. Not as long as Americans continue to believe they're " wasting" their votes by voting for someone who represents them.

You "wasted' your vote the last time, when you voted for Bush. Don't waste it again. Remember, if we continue to repeat the same behavior expecting different results, then we are truly insane.

And the lesser of two evils is still…evil.

© 2004 Mary Starrett - All Rights Reserved

[OldPossum]

Re your post 133, sorry to be so late. I was out of town for the day.

To the best of my knowledge, the H1B program was enacted by Congress. The executive branch administers it.

[gedeon3]

I lost my job as a software developer in sept. 2001, have not been able to work in IT ever since. I lost my house, one vehicle, my credit was trashed, and had to declare bankrupcy; still, I will never vote for kerry or any other leftist.

[jstolarczyk]

You brought up your belief that my opinion of Bush is based on my being in the military. Those men and women could potentially lose far more than you, at any moment, on any day. My point is they by in large see things differently than you do. My comment may not have been up to your standards of eloquence, but it was more polite than my first thought.