Why Bush isn't happy about an all-GOP Congress (Truly pathetic)

The Buffalo News | 11/17/02 | Robert Reich

[Druidstl]

Why Bush isn't happy about an all-GOP Congress By ROBERT B. REICH Featurewell.com 11/17/2002

President Bush must be worried. Why? Because he didn't want Republicans to control both houses of Congress. Like all first-term presidents, his biggest political goal is to be re-elected. A one-term presidency is considered a flop. Two terms and you get a chapter in the history books named after you. You get a decade named after you.

But now that Republicans are in control of both houses of Congress, the president will have less chance of being re-elected in 2004. It would be exactly the same, but in reverse, if a Democrat were in the White House. A Democratic president doesn't want to face re-election with a Democratic Congress.

Why not? For one thing, a Congress that's completely controlled by the same party as the president inevitably pushes that president toward that party's base, which is not where most of the votes are going to be found in the next presidential election.

A Republican-controlled Congress will push George W. Bush to the right. Its domestic agenda will be even more aggressively anti-abortion, pro-death penalty, pro-guns, more tax cuts for the wealthy, less regulation on big corporations.

And the president will have to go along. Or risk the wrath of his Republican conservative base. And if he goes along, he'll risk alienating voters in the vast middle - swing voters and independents he has to rely on if he's going to be re-elected.

Besides, an all-Republican Congress gives voters no one to blame when things go wrong other than Republicans, including, especially, the Republican-in-chief. And of course something's going to go wrong over the next two years.

When Democrats controlled at least one house, Republicans could blame them. A really dumb regulation? The Democrats pushed for it. An embarrassing leak to the press? The Democrats did it. A miscalculation on foreign policy? Democrats made it happen.

Besides, Americans like divided government. They like checks and balances. They'll be less likely to vote for a Republican president in 2004 now that Congress is already under the complete control of Republicans.

George W. Bush didn't need a Republican Congress to get done what he wanted to get done to be re-elected. He can't and won't do much about the economy. As for foreign policy, the president doesn't need Congress any more. He's already got his Iraqi war resolution. And as commander-in-chief, he has free rein to go after terrorism. Democrats aren't going to stop him.

Yes, the president campaigned like mad for Republican candidates. But that doesn't mean he wanted all of them to win. He wanted what any first-term president wants - to gain credit with party loyalists for having done what he could do, to show once again that he can raise a boat-load of money, to keep in his debt those congressional Republicans who did get re-elected and to show the public he's no slouch when it comes to aggressive campaigning. All important prerequisites for 2004.

So the president must be concerned. With Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, the president's chances of re-election have dimmed.

ROBERT B. REICH served as secretary of labor under President Clinton and unsuccessfully sought the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in Massachusetts.

[the_doc]

What's really funny is that the Dems really believe this kind of stuff.

(We tend to say "How can this be so? Gosh, they're just spewing out obvious lies?"

Ah, but there are different kinds of liars. Some liars are just fools who can't find it in themselves to know the Truth.)

[gc4nra]

"Two terms and
you get a chapter in the history books named after you. You get a decade named after you."

ROBERT B. REICH served as secretary of labor during the decade of Presidential perversity or the stainmeister decade or the monica decade or....

[marajade]

Kinda like putting it in Clinton's face isn't it...

[basil]

I'm interested in Mr. Reich's opinion on who the dim is who could even make a race out of running against Bush. Wonder if he thinks he's that man. LOL!

[Arkansas Banana Republican]

Funny how none of that applied when Mr. Reich's boss, Slick Willie, and the Demos had total control from '93-'95. Pitiful, but totally predictable

[Taxman]

Er, excuse me, doc, but didn't the American people just vote for the Bush foreign and domestic agenda, in spades?

Get a life, doc. Your Liberal/Socialist/Marxist dream just died a thousand deaths.

[Nick Danger]

That's right, fellow Democrats. Terry McAuliffe knew exactly what he was doing. By losing the Senate, and more seats in the House, and more State legislatures, we've actually won! We really stuck it to Bush this time...he's hosed! They run everything now.

Plus, Bush will now have to pander to his base, and they're all right-wing extremists. Not like the San Francisco Democrat we just elected to be House minority leader. See, we can have moderates like Nancy Pelosi, while they have crazy extremists running around alienating people.

Yep, we sure showed them. It was a Great Victory we won, especially here in Massachusetts. Following my own advice, I actually lost the primary, just so the Republicans would have a better chance in November. And now they've won the Governorship, so we've got them right where we want them!

Hail Clinton!

Denial <-- You are here.
Anger
Bargaining
Depression
Acceptance

[11th Earl of Mar]

It seems Reich has come up a little short... again.

[gc4nra]

"Yes, the president campaigned like mad for Republican candidates. But that doesn't mean he wanted all of them to win."


See, this just goes to prove he's as dumb as the left says, he actually campaigned too hard. How stupid <\sarcasim>

[lawdude]

Convoluted thinking - Reminds me of the ?riddle? -

What is the difference between a duck? One if its legs is both the same!

Reich is as insignificant as a gnats flatulence in a hurricane.

[gc4nra]

What brand cigar?

[facedown]

Just signed up today, eh?

Well, welcome aboard and enjoy!

p.s. I think the Woodward virus only works on Condi Rice and dead guys.

[TheRedSoxWinThePennant]

DATELINE WED NOV 8TH 2004

ROBERT REICH WITH A BUFFALO NEWS EXCLUSIVE

OUT OF SPIRIT OF BIPARTISIANSHIP DEMOCRATS LET BUSH WIN

secretly bush was trying to lose. Karl rove is so mad he threatens to resign

[rintense]

Hello, Robert... did you write this while sitting on the floor- because you are completely off your rocker.

[rintense]

Reich is just a few fries short of a happy meal.

[Common Tator]

ROBERT B. REICH served as secretary of labor under President Clinton

Robert Reich is a true democrat spouting what every Democratic President knows.

Democratic presidents are afraid to run when their policies have been enacted. They know the public will hold them responsible for their failure.

[Cobra64]

A pathetic little piece by a pathetic little man.

Yup. What is it with these little weasels (Resiche and Daschle)?

They continually yip and snipe, constantly, at President Bush's heels?

It's time for El Rushbo to rant and rip on Reische as he did on Daschle last week.

[CyberAnt]

He was hyperventilating on Hannity & Colmes the other night and I thought I would fall over laughing. These people need to lighten up.

We didn't go ballistic after we lost in 1996. I just don't understand why they are so insulted they didn't get elected. Geeeeeezzzz!

[Always Right]

DNC must have put out a memo this week in trying to turn the most embarrassing loss in the history of US politics into a victory. First convince everyone that SD senate race was the most important of all the races, then tell everyone that the Dems meant to lose control of the Senate.

[Cobra64]

You have to love these guys. Now they are trying to convince us (and themselves) that winning is really losing.

This is nothing new. The day after Clinton was impeached, there was a celebration in the White House Rose Garden, when Al Gore made the statement, "President Clinton is the best President in our nation's history."

Yes, they are delusional. Too many LSD tabs in the late 1960s.