Bush Loses Reelection in '04
Published January 07, 2004
[Written in response to the ridiculously confident post Bush Wins Reelection in '04.]
Hate him or hate him, the numbers indicate the President is going down:
CNN: Dean Leads Democrats, Trails Bush by Only 5 PointsInside Politics reports on a new CNN/Time Poll of 1,004 adult Americans conducted by telephone on December 30 and January 1. Despite constant attacks from the inside-the-beltway pundits and campaigns, who keep charging that Dean is "unelectable," he now trails George Bush by a mere 5 points — 51% to 46%.
Just to put that into perspective: in April of 1992, Bill Clinton trailed George H.W. Bush by 20 points. [Blog for America]
Especially once Dean starts becoming more familiar to the voters, instead of merely being defined as the "angry" candidate, he should prove a shoo-in for the Presidency.
He was right about the Iraq war, the President lied about it. He has a solid plan to reduce WMD proliferation and combat terrorism in a worldwide, effective way--while the President's main accomplishment in that area is a $200B unilateral invasion of a country that lacked WMD and is now creating new terrorists and increasing chaos in the region.
"Facts are preferable to ideology" is one of Dean's key planks. By November, voters will agree, as ideology brought us tax rebates for the rich at the expense of everybody else, record deficits, regulatory agencies turned over to the industries they are supposed to regulate, and a useless war based on deceit that has made the country less safe.
Dean is polling impressively high nationally right now. And the true value of his unprecedented grass-roots organization has yet to be seen. People actually feel involved with politics in the Dean campaign, and that will make a huge difference in motivation and turnout.
- Bush Loses Reelection in '04
- Published: January 07, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Politics
- Writer: Brian Flemming
- Brian Flemming's BC Writer page
- Brian Flemming's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
I must say I'm intrigued by a candidate whose most notable demonstration of personal courage is the black diamond at Killington.
Dean all the way. The alternative is too scary. Bush is a nut job.
Mike, you're still here? I thought you were off to Israel to get a spine implant or a hero injection or some jive like that.
Eric,
The confidence projected in my post is tongue in cheek.
Do you really think that one can predict the results of the November election now? 10 months is an eternity in politics.
Virtually all the predictions about George H.W. at this time in 1992 were that he would win in a landslide.
Nobody knows what will happen this year. According to CNN, Bush wins by only 5 points if the election were held today--against a challenger barely known to many voters.
Who wins in November depends on the conditions that exist then. Neither of us knows what Bush Administration corruption scandals will have erupted by then, or turns of history for that matter. It could be Bush in a landslide. Or it could be a squeaker. Or it could be a Dean landslide.
Any result will look inevitable in retrospect.
It's a little early to be pulling any conclusive evidence from polls. Last time I checked the Dems were still sorting themselves out and the GOP hadn't even started addressing a candidate yet. It is a little early for this proclamation. You might turn out to be right, but coming to this conclusion this early based on this poll is unsound logic.
My apologies to Brian for not noticing the context of this being a response post. My bad.
As I said, anything could happen, and it could. But based upon the current situation, the trends, the demographics, I am willing to predict a Bush victory - I have no idea by what margin. This is a prediction, nothing more and nothing less.
Actually, Craig, my bad. I shouldn't have assumed the reader would know. I have updated the post with the line,
[Written in response to the ridiculously confident post Bush Wins Reelection in '04.]
we'll see what happens if the 'jobless' part of the 'recovery' doesn't change.
i think that'll have more impact than anything else (baring another nasty terrorist incident, that is).
I can't wait for Cheney's corruption trial. That'll be something to see.
I am willing to predict a Bush victory - I have no idea by what margin.
If you don't feel it's a comfortable margin, how are you confident enough to make a prediction?
I mean, how far is a squeaker race from a Bush loss?
It's no big deal that you made a prediction, but it is pretty ridiculous, given your level of confidence and that it's seemingly based on one USA Today poll.
Actually, shouldn't we be looking for state-by-state polls? The popular vote doesn't matter.
"I must say I'm intrigued by a candidate whose most notable demonstration of personal courage is the black diamond at Killington."
Just out of curiosity, what would be Bush's most notable demonstration of personal courage at the time he ran for office?
...chopping firewood in the middle of the summer...in texas?
Well, he did attend flight school I believe, or is there a website refuting that, too? And giving up the bottle?
Not one square inch of the State of Texas fell to the Viet Cong while Bush bravely patrolled the skies in the "Champage Unit" of the Texas Air National Guard.
(Of course, yes, Dean should get credit for protecting the slopes of Aspen.)
I've been saying it all along - this story just confirmed my own thoughts to the extent that I was willing to make a prediction. And a victory is a victory - the margin doesn't matter.
Thanks for the backup, Brian. It raises a curious point, though, do you think that pilots currently assigned to similarly units, I mean not actively engaged in Afghanistan or Iraq, should be subjected to derision because of their "cushy" assignments?
A current Guard pilot should be subject to derision if he meets the following qualifications:
1. He checked "do not volunteer for overseas service" on his application form and trained exclusively on a plane not being used any longer for warfare, yet ran for president later and claimed, "I could have been called up at any time."
2. He clearly joined the Guard to escape the draft, using conections only a rich and privileged person would have, then went AWOL, yet ran for president later as a patriot.
Both of which are true of President Bush.
Also Perle's corruption trial. That's going to be the mother of them all.
And let's not forget about Rove's "I leaked the law and the law one" trial. Smokin'! They're going to have to set up a separate wing at the penitentiary for all these clowns.
"Republicans In Pinstripes." It's the new fashion. And we're not talking about business suits!
There it is Brian, it's on the internet so it must be true.
1. Perhaps the reason those aircraft are called trainers is because that's what they're exclusively for. Do you have anything serious that actually disputes he could have been called up at any time?
2. I certainly hope there aren't any guys currently in the guard to escape the draft. Again, and your proof is...?
Really though, this thread is about the splendor of Howard Dean. If your best arguments for Dean lack any more substance than just: well, here's how crappy Bush is, it's probably going to be a long year for you.
"Republicans In Pinstripes." It's the new fashion. And we're not talking about business suits!
this is the return of the teflon administration.
i'd be surprised if anybody got sent up the river for anything
People who do actually bet money on Presidential elections turn to off-shore sportsbooks. The books have sharp statisticians that are mainly interested in balancing action on both sides. I would think that this would reflect the true odds better than a poll, which might or might not be biased. Odds fluctuate (like the stock market), but if Eric wanted to get a bet down on Bush now, he would need to risk about $2.40 to win $1.00. If you relate it to a football game, it would make Bush about a 6 point favorite. Not a lock to be sure.
Things have changed. If Bush does better than in 2000 and wins by a small margin, he won't be confronted with Al Gore and dispirited Dems.
If Dean is the nominee, the grass roots organization he built can remain a powerful force which can check Bush.
And if someone else is the nominee, a lot of the people working for Dean will transfer their energy to defeating Bush (and his agenda if he wins).
But as I said in the other topic, I wouldn't make confident predictions based on USA Today or anything else now.
It is way too early for either Republicans or Dems to be confident. A lot will happen between now and November. This is going to be a very interesting year.
This assumption that there is actually going to be an election in the USA this fall is sort of touching, like believing in Santa Claus (tm - Coca Cola Inc.).
You think after the couple of months of squeaking their vote fraud past the last time, they are going to let you unqualified fools mess up a good thing this time around.?
Since Patriot II has been signed into law, you can expect marshal law by mid-October.
Or Sylvester Stallone playing Judge Dredd II (in conjunction with Taco Bell).
You shouldn't put too much stock in these polls so early in this thing. We still have a LONG way to go.
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/11523)
Brian, you can tell the world why Dean should win all you want, but the USA today poll says it won't happen. If I were a betting man - and I'm not - I would take this bet: it's a sure thing.