[lbo-talk] Bush's Re-election Chances

Jon Johanning jjohanning at igc.org
Mon Feb 2 07:49:13 PST 2004


On Sunday, February 1, 2004, at 09:20 PM, lbo at hvgreens.org wrote:


> 1) People on the left have
> consistently underestimated Shrub, with 2002 being a prime example.

Yeah, there's been a lot of wishful thinking. Reminds you of the proverbial comment by a Democrat after Reagan won: "I don't see how it happened. Everyone I know voted against him!"


> 2) The
> Dems look better now than they will in the fall because of the
> contested Dem
> primaries (nightly news shows only Dems)

I don't have time to waste watching TV news, but it seems to me that Shrub is getting plenty of coverage (every time he opens his pie hole) in the other media.


> while the Repubs' are not contested, of course.

The Dems' criticisms of Bush are certainly getting covered.


> 3) The capture of Saddam is a big plus for Shrub, while the daily body
> count is a negative.

I don't have any solid poll number to confirm it, but I think the Saddam thing is becoming old news, which isn't exciting folks who aren't already in Shrub's camp. I think that if he brags a lot about it in the fall campaign, independents will say, "What have you done for us lately, George?"


> 4) While job loss is a big negative for Shrub, GDP,
> productivity, profits and personal wealth will all be up a lot by
> November, not
> to mention consumer confidence.

Maybe -- some economic forecasters are suggesting that employment won't improve much if at all. Too soon to say.


> 5) Bush is the incumbent and unlike the Dems,
> Repubs just don't seem to be as good at dropping the ball like Bore
> (excuse,
> Gore) did.

They are much more disciplined (almost remind me of a "democratic centralist" party -- have they been reading their Lenin and Trotsky?), but OTOH, if independent voters decide in the fall that what they are pushing is BS, it won't matter how disciplined they are. The more they push the BS, the worse it will be for them.


> If you thought I was setting the stage to say that I think Bush will
> probably
> win, you'd be right. Sure, the Dems will fight the good fight, but
> then
> loyally
> fall on their swords (like they always do, after all that's what Dems
> are for.)
> My biggest fear is that Greens and other progressives get snookered
> into the
> "everything to beat Bush" mantra, only to see Shrub win anyway. I
> don't care
> to get my tugboat hitched to a sinking ship, thank-you. I'd rather go
> all out
> and work for the Green Presidential nominee.

If you want to work for the Green nominee, whoever that may be, fine. It's a free country. :-) I would predict that that nominee will get no more than about 1% or so of the popular vote and hopefully will not throw the Electoral College to Shrub. As for falling on swords after a Shrub victory, I think that Democrats as well as independent leftists will be outraged and furious if Shrub wins, and will be prepared to do anything *but* fall on their swords. In fact, I think it will be a radicalizing event (not that I would argue, as some leftists are doing, that we should all be working *for* Shrub to make sure that this event happens). The Republicans will be very sorry if he wins, I predict, because his second term will be as much or more of a disaster than Nixon's was.

Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________________ Belinda: Ay, but you know we must return good for evil. Lady Brute: That may be a mistake in the translation.

-- Sir John Vanbrugh: The Provok’d Wife (1697), I.i.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list