Bush Wins, Barely - Edwards 2008?
Published November 03, 2004
Okay, so Bush wins. What should have been a cakewalk — a sitting president mid-war — was very close because no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, because the insurgency has been more potent than we had hoped, because the administration didn't plan very well for the "peace" there, because Bush did quite poorly in the debates, because Kerry proved more tenacious and appealing than most expected, because the get out the youth vote — though still the same 17% as 2000, was certainly a "success" because turnout across the board was massive — heavily favored Kerry, and because the cumulative effect of the press, in particular print, heavily favored Kerry and the cry of "failed presidency" rang out from so many pens. But he, Bush, won nonetheless.
I voted for Bush for reasons stated here, but I have all kinds of reservations about another Bush presidency — the Supreme Court, environment, erosion of the separation of church and state, civil rights, ie, virtually his entire crappy social agenda — and assuming some measure of success in the war on terror, I could very well return to the Democratic fold in four years.
How might that be accomplished, given the clear conservative social agenda of much of the nation as expressed by the citation of "moral values" as the primary issue of so many voters?
William Saletan has some keen observations in Slate:
- I think this is the answer: Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.
Bush is a very simple man. You may think that makes him a bad president, as I do, but lots of people don't--and there are more of them than there are of us. If you don't believe me, take a look at those numbers on your TV screen.
Think about the simplicity of everything Bush says and does. He gives the same speech every time. His sentences are short and clear. "Government must do a few things and do them well," he says. True to his word, he has spent his political capital on a few big ideas: tax cuts, terrorism, Iraq. Even his electoral strategy tonight was powerfully simple: Win Florida, win Ohio, and nothing else matters. All those lesser states--Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Hampshire--don't matter if Bush reels in the big ones.
This is what so many people like about Bush's approach to terrorism. They forgive his marginal and not-so-marginal screw-ups, because they can see that fundamentally, he "gets it." They forgive his mismanagement of Iraq, because they see that his heart and will are in the right place. And while they may be unhappy about their economic circumstances, they don't hold that against him. What you and I see as unreflectiveness, they see as transparency. They trust him.
- Bush Wins, Barely - Edwards 2008?
- Published: November 03, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Politics
- Writer: Eric Olsen
- Eric Olsen's BC Writer page
- Eric Olsen's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
"assuming some measure of success in the war on terror, I could very well return to the Democratic fold in four years."
So...if the Republicans want to keep your vote, they should botch the war on terror over the next four years? Hmm... ;-)
Eric - regarding your reservations about the Supreme Court. I read the other day that if the Justices voted the way that the presidents that appointed them voted, roe v. wade would have been overturned a long time ago. The idea of the article was that most of the justices actually do believe that it's not their job to legislate from the bench, but to interpret the constitution.
Just a thought.
Eric Olsen: I will not go for another hard core social conservative.
You won't need to, the damage is done.
Andy, I hope you're right
RJ, no, I am saying that if Bush is successful, after 8 years of social conservatism, the middle - of which I am squarely a member - will probably be ready for a different set of priorities.
Bryan, good points, can't really argue with them
and I agree the fact that Bush won the popular vote is absolutely central to what should be seen as a new, higher level of legitimacy for him now
http://election.sos.state.oh.us/ProvBallots.htm
The above website shows the latest tally approx of 135,000 provisional ballots. Some counties are missing but it seems that this provision ballot list is somewhat statistically distributed. I would be very surprised if more than additional 40,000 ballots "just appears". I hope the election judges prevent voter fraud with these provisional ballots (i.e., catch those who may have voted more than once).
Um, you left out what seem to me to be the most important reasons why Kerry did so well:
(a) The Bush campaign tried to steal the election of 2000
(b) Bush lied us into a war.
It doesn't so much matter to me who really won the 2000 election (Gore probably, but it's a very tough call).
Nor does it matter so much to me that the Iraq war is likely (though fortunately not guaranteed) to have very bad long-term consequences for the US and the world.
What matters to me is that Bush & co. are willing to lie, cheat, and steal even with regard to the most solemn and important of matters.
As a kid, I was taught that such men ruled elsewhere, but not here. For some reason I guess I always sort of believed that.
Um, I'm over that now, incidentally.
Winston, I can't agree with either a or b: both sides did all they could to pull out the 2000 victory, Bush ahd the advantage of a sympathetic Supreme Court - how is that "stealing"?
Re Iraq, you can spin it anyway you want, and I have no doubt the administration looked at all available intelligence through the glasses that most favored their preconceived notions, but that is not the same as lying. Clearly the American people did not agree that "Bush lied" or they would have voted him out.
Scary that politics will be decided by the Jesus crowd for the next few cycles.
Edwards is a really scary prospect. No qualifications other than being a slick talker (who's obsessed with his hair). I was worried that he'd get the nomination this time, because I think he would have won.
One thing's for sure, though. The Democrats won't put Hillary out there in 2008. If they want to win, they have to find a "Christian" candidate from the South or the Heartland.
Think Bill Clinton with his pants up.
Scary that politics will be decided by the Jesus crowd for the next few cycles.
Well the "Jesus crowd" finds the other side scary.
Vic
I don't know about Edwards -- NC went Republican again, at about the same margin as 2000, when a favorite son wasn't on the ticket. And the Republicans picked up Edwards Senate seat. So I can't see where he pulled his electoral weight.
I don't think the basic point is Edwards perse, but the realization that simple, easy to define and comprehend is what the nation seems to be saying it wants
Just a quick note, Eric: you should examine the various trade agreements that this administration has signed - protectionist to the core.
As is the $180 billion agriculture bill.
Gotta go, more later.
Well the "Jesus crowd" finds the other side scary.
-------
The "Jesus crowd" finds everyone scary that are not part of the "Jesus crowd".
I use to just find them amusing but now I see how lethal they can be.
jack e. jett
Ohioans should be ashamed. You have chosen a man that went to the pulpit to send his message. Any group that focuses their message via religion is using religon as their weapon. They show no morals in their actions then ask you to lower yours by casting a vote for them. Remember this, Bush isn't a believer, he'a a deciever. This admnistration never told the truth. Isn't that a core value? Telling the truth. Shame on you, shame on you all.
Eric,
Gore did not "do all he could" to win in 2000. He told Dems to stay out of the streets and conduct themselves in a civil fashion. The Rep.s treated it like war, busing in syntho-crowds, threatening violence, bringing in their "electronic command post", printing up those idiotic "SoreLoserman" signs, and working hard to keep votes from being counted.
Re: the war: it was part self-deception and part us-deception. He flat-out lied and there's no way around it in the State of the Union address. That was demonstrably a lie.
Yep, that's what America needs, simple plans for simple minds. And here I used to think you should have a smart guy for your president. Silly me.
Resolve does not make you right!
Resoluteness does not make you right!
Just because people you don't like think you're wrong, doesn't make you right!
The will to sacrifice others for your ideals doesn't make you right!
Only the will to see things from both sides, to research, to discuss, to learn, will make you right.
The "Jesus crowd" finds everyone scary that are not part of the "Jesus crowd".
I use to just find them amusing but now I see how lethal they can be.
Lethal, right. Put the ideals of that crowd on one side of the room and those of the folks that give Howard Stern huge ratings on the other and I know which side I'll choose.
You just don't get it, and there's no explaining it to you.
Vic
Jack:
Whatever.
For the first time ever, I tuned into the Stern show on E! yesterday to see what the big deal was about. They had two segments, both involving bikini clad women who didn't seem to think much of themselves. One of them was asking the crew to rate her for Playboy (she was 40 and attractive), and at one point she removed her top. They were critiquing her like a piece of meat while she stood there and took it all in.
It was truly low and disgusting... the woman on the show who is a regular looked like she's just going through the motions of playing along, Stern was the grandmaster, and the guys in the crew looked like a bunch of lowlife frat boys licking their chops.
Yeah, I'll go with the other side that thinks that stuff like that is wrong, thanks very much.
Vic
Scott "Ohioans should be ashamed. You have chosen a man that went to the pulpit to send his message. Any group that focuses their message via religion is using religon as their weapon."
And who was it that spent the last 6 Sundays before the election "preaching" in churches? All Black churches BTW
If your answer is Senator Pander you would be correct.
good point Marc. But it doesn't count because he was just faking it.
all things in moderation
and you don't have to be stupid to be simple. Clinton was able to boil it down and simplify - few would accuse him of being stupid, other than as regards his Willie
vic:
howard stern is not president. his power is commercial
howard stern is an idiot who entertains.
george w. bush is an idiot who governs when he is not french kissing jesus.
jack e. jett
Kerry went to several black churches this year, demanding their vote, and lying about widespread "disenfranchisement" in 2000.
But, I guess that's okay, right?
North Carolina sent Edwards to the Senate over an incumbent GOP Senator backed by Jesse Helms. Edwards was judged on his merits and presents as both very bright and energetic. For the same reasons he has risen quickly as a star in the Democratic Party going from law office to Senate to Vice Presidential candidate. He would have won his Senate seat this year because he was better able to counter the attack ads spawned with millions of dollars from outside NC which associated Bowles with Clinton. The Dems need a sensible moderate voice that communicates easily the Dem. message of inclusion and Edwards' message of optimism and everyone pulling their weight. The Dems. need to latch onto Edwards' star.
I went to the posting Eric made about why (incredibly!) he voted for Bush.
He states that, make no mistake about it, Bush is in charge - he's "the one
pulling the strings."
That's interesting - how does Eric know this? I guess he's been at a few
White House meetings -
Hey Scott, you should be ashamed of yourself for blaming Ohio. This kind of thinking is quite simple even if you were partially kidding. The entire country was split down the middle. Ohio was almost exactly split down the middle. So, the diversity of our opinion is actually quite impressive here in this state. For that, I am not ashamed.
Richard, Is it "incredible" that millions of Americans - enough to reelect him even! - voted for Bush, or just that I did?
Anyway, regarding my presence at White House meetings, if you have been following the literature, there is plenty out there on what goes on in meetings, Bush's management style, his interaction with others in the administration, that justifies my statement.
And Ohio was THE battleground state because it is exactly a microcosm of the nation.
But Eric, you should be ashamed of yourself, dirty Ohioan!
as goes Ohio, so goeth the nation, dirt and all
You are right on the money re John Edwards. Had the Democratic establishment not "annointed" John Kerry as their nominee, and put all their resources behind John Edwards, we probably would not have had to deal with Bush and his cronies for another four years. I am a staunch Democrat, and have always voted for the Democratic candidate, including Kerry (though I knew they would do exactly what they did to him), and I fear that the Democrats are going to shoot themselves in the foot yet again with Hillary. I think she would make a good President, but she will never, never, never be able to get elected. If the Democrats nominate her, we will all go off the cliff with her. If the Democratic leadership is smart (Please be smart this time! This country needs you to be smart!!) they will get behind John Edwards. He is the one person -- Republican or Democrat -- who can truly bring this country together and make us great again. And don't let that charm and dazzling smile fool you -- they are assets of a very smart man. For once, I find charisma not to be a useless word. God knows after Bush, some smarts and charisma would be welcomed indeed!
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/21813)
I don't necessarily think he won "barely". Granted, yes it could have been alot HIGHER of a win, but given the negative's thrown at bush since he became president in 2000 (it started all the way back then and reached a peak in the last few months), I thought he did well.
I mean, I consider his win HUGE simply because he was battling against ALL THE ELEMENTS. THe world hates him, the terrorist hate him, the democrats hate him, half the country hates him, Michael Moore makes a film about hating him, the terrorist want to keep killing us, we have an Iraq war not going as well as expected, and yes, the country overwhelmingly said, "We want Bush for 4 more years".
He has the highest popular vote of all time, he beat Kerry by over 3 million votes, he is leading Ohio by 140,000, he won Florida by 300,000.
I think it would be safe to say that Kerry got an ass whoopin, but I don't want that to be my official statement because counting is still going on :)
but I get your point of what you are talking about, just wanted to throw another viewpoint in the air.