Letter From Chairman Racicot And Attached Memo From Matthew Dowd on President Bush's Agenda

Letter From Chairman Racicot And Attached Memo From Matthew Dowd on President Bush's Agenda

President Bush continues to focus on his agenda of ensuring America's economic, national and homeland security. While the President remains focused on America's priorities, much will be written about his level of support among the American people. Today I received a memo that puts much of the political hyperbole surrounding that support into perspective, I thought it was important to share with you.

President Bush has received unprecedented approval from the American people however, these ratings will settle over time. It is important to note that the inevitable political posturing by Democrats and pundits will ebb and flow based on the rise and fall of some numbers but the leadership and the resolve of this President will always remain.

TO: Governor Marc Racicot
FR: Mathew Dowd
Senior Advisor, Republican National Committee

President Bush sustained a significantly elevated approval rating in the aftermath of his handling of the tragedy surrounding 9/11. Today his approval ratings are again elevated in the aftermath of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Just as we counseled last spring in the aftermath of 9/11 that the President’s approval numbers would begin to settle out in the months leading up to election day 2002, expect the current high approval numbers to drop to a more realistic level. After 9/11 the President’s approval rating settled at a slower rate over several months with some pundits and Democrats predicting the "sky is falling" each step of the way. The current approval number should settle out beginning fairly soon and happen much faster this time but you can expect a chorus of the "sky is falling" again.

The main difference between then and now is the Democratic base is solidly against the War in Iraq and therefore the approval rise was never going to be as high as the numbers after 9/11 or as long lasting. Our two most recent Presidents to win re-election provide some historical perspective for the relationship between approval ratings and electoral success. President’s Clinton and Reagan were both re-elected by large margins with each having approval ratings in the 50s.

As we get closer to the start of the 2004 Presidential election campaign, the Democratic base vote will continue to solidify. And as President Bush is tested in media polls on head to head ballot questions, it will not be surprising to see the President behind in some polls against potential Democratic candidates and generic Democratic opposition. Every incumbent President in the last 25 years has been behind the opposition in the latter part of his first term- the sky is not falling.

* Throughout 1983, former President Reagan was behind Walter Mondale by as many as nine points, and against possible opponent John Glenn, Reagan was behind by as much as 17 points in 1983. Even at the beginning of 1984, the polls showed the race between Reagan and Mondale was a statistical dead heat. Reagan won in a landslide carrying 49 states.

* In 1987 and 1988, Vice President George Bush was behind in generic ballot polls by as many as 15 points, and against Michael Dukakis throughout 1988 Bush was behind by as many as 17 points. It was not until the Republican convention in late summer 1988 that Bush took a small solid lead. Bush went on to win by a fairly good margin in November.

* In 1995 and early 1996, former Senator Robert Dole was often ahead of Clinton in ballot polling. The Wall Street Journal showed Dole with a two point lead in 1995. And Gallup had Dole with small leads in 1995 and January 1996 Dole had a three point lead over Clinton.

In addition to approval numbers, pundits and Democrats will place an emphasis on re-elect numbers. Again it is important to have an understanding of historical precedent. Throughout 1995 President Clinton’s re-elect hardly ever got above 40%. In a Battleground poll in April, 1995, Clinton’s re-elect was 21%. The highest point Clinton’s re-elect reached in 1995 was 43% in a poll due in December 1995 for Associated Press. In spite of the low re-elect number, President Clinton ending up winning re-election comfortably.

More recently, in 2002, every major statewide candidate with a re-elect of 45% or higher --- won! The average actual result on election day 2002 showed incumbents finishing 5 to 10 points above their re-elect numbers. It is no longer accurate to suggest that a candidate is vulnerable based solely on an incumbent having a re-elect number under 50%.

As the inevitable discussion proceeds in the months ahead, this memo should provide both perspective and a reality check. President Bush’s approval numbers will again fall back to more realistic levels fairly quickly, and in head to head polls in the months ahead President Bush will at times likely be behind potential Democrats just as former Vice President Bush and Presidents Clinton and Reagan were going into the election. All were quite successful on election day.

There are always three basic factors in all elections involving an incumbant. The first is likabiltiy. The second are positions on the issues, and perception of performance.

The first misconception to understand is that 3rd party candidates do not change the outcome of elections. People who vote for third party candidates have given up on both major parties. It may surprise you but the Nader Greenie voters in 2000 thought that Bush was no worse than Gore on the enviornment. If Nader had not been on the ballot many of them would not have voted for president. Those that did would have split nearly 50/50 for Gore and Bush. The same is true of the Perot people in 1992 and 1996.

Is there a single Democratic candidate that is likable? There is not. Bush is likable. Infact there is data to show that had Gore been likable he would have won in 2000.

I suspect that even if the economy stays bad, Bush will hold his base and take over half the center. If the economy is showing signs of major improvement Bush will win 2004 in a landslide.

There was a time in the 30s and 40s that the Democrats owned the economy and national security issues. Ike turned that around for Republicans. And Jimmy Carter who allowed the US to be humiliated by Iran, gave the national security issue to the Republicans. The Democrats continued to hold the economy issue.

Now the Democrats have taken the tax more, balance the budget, and negotiate with evil approach that was taken by Republicans in the 30's and 40's.

Rober A. Taft (Mr. Republican) of the 30's and 40's would have agreed with Tom Daschle far more than with President Bush. And Harry Truman would agree with Bush far more than he would agree with Daschle. On many issues the parties have swapped sides in the last 55 years.

IT seems to me that the Democrats have taken the bad Republican positions of 50 years ago and mated them with the bad Democrat positions of 50years ago. On the other hand the Republicans have adopted the good positions of Democrats of 50 years ago and mated them to good Republican ideas from 50 years ago.

It seems to me the leftist media has lost its power to persuade the right and the center. It seems to me the Democrats are on the wrong side of history, and the attempt to move the party back to the center as new Democrats has failed. The Democrats are skewing left. They think they lost in 2002 becuase they were not left enough. I often wonder what the Democratic political consultants think. They know the score, but the people that hire them would fire them if they told them the truth. Perhaps the Democrats will have to lose by a huge margin in both 2005 and 2008 before trying to get it right in 2012. But it could be that it will be 2016 before enough of the current Democratic power structure is gone, to allow the Democrats to recover as a centerist left party. It is not a good time to be a Democrat. With in 8 years the Democrats will not even have a majority of hte media behind them.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.