A Kerry Landslide?

Washington Monthly ^ | 4/6/04 | Todd

[eyespysomething]

Bush is Tarzan and Kerry is Jane?

[eyespysomething]

By the way does Kerry have the charisma of Reagan?

Oh sure, he has that American morning optimism just oozing out of his pores.

< /sarcasm>

[Nonstatist]

I think Rove is a horrible, horrible influence here.

Excellently put; a too-clever amateur(Rove) that is way over his head. Not wanting to take any flack for cutting spending while a "war" is ongoing, his advice now has us dealing with the reality of a weak dollar and a budget way whacked out of balance. Re-election.. then what? Yecch.

[KOZ.]

or maybe, just maybe......bush is bush and kerry is kerry

[Choose Ye This Day]

...he has provoked--both by his policies and his partisanship--an extremely strong reaction...

His partisanship? "HIS" partisanship?!?

What freaking planet is this guy living on?

[ilgipper]

I saw the commercial last night, it had him saying something like that.

[F.J. Mitchell]

ROFLMAO! Pulling this off would require the dems to use so much smoke that they would lose the support of the enviro wackos, and the mirrors they would have to use would deflect so much heat back at the sun that a melt down would ensue. On the sun that is, while the smoke threw the earth into an everlasting ice age.

The Dims just haven't created enough idiots to make this work, at this time.

[jpl]

Anyone who is seriously comparing the economy today to that of 1980 obviously doesn't remember that period very well or never even lived through it. About the only similarity is that gasoline prices are really high right now; in every other respect the comparison is laughable on its face.

[faithincowboys]

I think this guy is operating on a lot of willfully incorrect data. There wasn't historically high turnout in the Dem primary elections.

I will give the Kerry people this --they have the media in the tank for them, an iffy situation in Iraq, the S & M torture photos, lagging job creation, lots of shady anti-Bush whistleblowers, "the perceived Nam advantage", the myth that Cheney & Halliburton are profiterring, 54 electoral votes in CA and Blank many in NY that are basically slam dunks.

Not least of all, the Bush=Cheny re-elect operation doesn't seem to be that gtifted and it needs to be. I think Hughes, McClellan and Bartlett aren't pros--they are totally outmatched!

[F.J. Mitchell]

Now if our troops had done something like that to those prisoners in Iraq, I would agree with those calling the actions an atrosity. Even Saddam would never have done that to a living human being. Only someone who hates themselves for living, would voluntarily have that done to rhemselves.

One bullet in the head would be much more merciful and humane.

[RightWhale]

More like an avalanche that he will attempt to ride all the way down on his snowboard.

[You Dirty Rats]

I'm sorry; it was over the top.

The Pope MIGHT convert to Islam, and I suppose the Zionists are responsible in Saudi Arabia. I shouldn't have linked those highly unlikely events with the clearly ridiculous idea that the Red Sox could actually win the Serious.

[boxsmith13]

"What happens when you spend 8 years in college smoking dope."


I wouldnt write this off so quickly. He makes soem good points such as Bush's poor poll numbers but also he reaches by comparing Bush to Carter and 2004's economy to that of 1980

[Wolfstar]

Good Lord, Fintan, that is the ugliest thing I have seen in many a year. Whatever it is, it's a perfect representative of the Left's secular, nihilist, "if it feels good, do it" creed. The thing must live off the state, because it can't have a job unless it: (a) lives in San Francisco, or (b) is in some kind of circus.

One thing's for certain: If the jihidists win the war, this sort of exhibitionism will go the way of the dinosaur.

[boxsmith13]

biggest problem for Bush is that he cant even get the 48.5% he got in 2000 must less 50%

But Carter essentially quit the race in the early fall even refusing to debate Reagan in the first debate. Bush wont do that.

Kerry may win but not by 10% and 400EVs

[boxsmith13]

"There is one superficially valid comparison of Carter to W. Both will have presided over strongly inflationary economies."

not really true. We were worried about deflation till about one year ago. CPI should begin to increase but it wont be as bad as the 1970s because the global economy is structured much differently than in 1979

[arthurus]

The marker for the beginning of the inflation was the rise in the price of gold. Prices have heretofore not advanced much because the money was all going overseas. We called it the balance of payments deficit. Well it is catching up now in our own economy. Bush turned the boat around tosail with the already reversed current when he "devaluated" the dollar, i/e. pushed massive amounts of dollars into the economy. In an er of floating exchange rates a devaluation can occur only by rapidly inflating. The rise in prices is NOT inflation. It is a pretty much inevitible result of inflation but is not always coterminous. Price rises were also less apparent than they could be because American industry went through a long period of reducing real costs even as their prices did not rise so they made more dollars for the same output/same prices. In noninflationary times those prices would have fallen. Commodity prices have been rising for a couple of years. I suspect that the perceived effects will be severe a few months after the election and will cost the Republicans the Congress and the presidency in 08 but could start to be really annoying by September of this year. Watch for big strikes and labor unrest. That is the signal that the inflation is hurting and is the cue to the people that the Democrats Are Right. Another factor that may be in W's favor is that the economy is improving and wages are rising as employers seek more workers. In a stagnant inflationary economy prices go up and wages lag quite a bit.

[boxsmith13]

"Watch for big strikes and labor unrest"


I dont agree with everything youve written but I do agree with this part. One reason hours lost to strikes declined so much in the 1980s and 1990s was the reduction in inflation. The 1970s saw a huge number of hours lost due to strikes and it was the result of rising inflation...good call

[arthurus]

The strikes happen because the value that the workers are receiving is declining in an inflation-it gets harder and harder to pay one's bills as the value of the dollars declines. In a deflation there are no wage strikes because, even as one's pay does not rise in dollars, those dollars buy more so there is de facto pay raise.

When an inflation gets under weigh it is a while before the de facto decline in the wage causes strikes.There have been no such strikes in the last couple of years because the existing inflation has been going offshore and other economies have seen the price level rise while our pols have thought they have made the magic tweak by flooding the market with dollars at just the right time in just the right amount.Keynesians are like that but it didn't happen. Gold started up immediately and commodities followed 1 to 2 quarters later, then consumer prices elsewhere. The continuing efficiciency increases in American industry masked the early portions of the rise by lowering some real prices even as nominal prices stayed steady.

I am not yet quite convinced that this inflation which was gently begun in Clinton's last year and pushed with vigor by the Bush FED is for the classic reasons,i.e. to default on part of the Debt unless in anticipation of large deficits.

Inflation is always deliberate on the part of the government, even if for different superficial reasons, like "boosting the economy" and it is always to reduce the debt of the ruler. It was true with the Roman Emporers who did it by reducing the precious metal content in the coinage in order to be able to make more solidii with the same amount of gold and thus to retain more gold to pay off the emperors' debt.It has been true of every system of paper money and is easier. Unlike with gold, the paper supply is pretty much inexhaustible.

One superficial upside to this inflation is that it is, indeed, reducing the real debt. The reduction in real money debt will have been maybe 35% as indicated by the 60% rise in gold. That is, in fact, default. That's great for the government but bad for the economy because creditors are receiving reduced values for their loans and many lose money on the deal making loan money more difficult to obtain, i.e., interest rates go up. That is happening and gives people with mortgages a last chance right now to get in on the scam by converting their ARMs to fixed rate, thereby repaying the loans with ever smaller dollars

[BlackRazor]

So Bush's approval needs to drop a mere 16%? I understand the comparison now.

It could happen. When approval ratings fall, they tend to fall fast. Carter himself had 52/38 approve/disapprove numbers in early March 1980. Just four weeks later he was at 39/51, and he never recovered. Still, the author's comparison of the economic conditions is deeply flawed. If Bush's popularity craters and he loses this election, it will be because of Iraq, not the economy.