"the reason Bush will lose is that I think political incompetence kills a politician in the end. Bush is riding high on the terror war support, but then Carter got almost a year of flag waving support off of the hostage crisis. It'll fade. And what will be left by 2004 are $200 billion deficits, a rotten economy, and a world plunged into conflicts. "
and this in 2002: http://www.nathannewman.org/log/archives/000183.shtml
"War is not a guaranteed winner for incumbents. There is a short rally around the flag period, especially if things go well, but prolonged conflict can be very bad. Lincoln almost lost reelection in 1864 and probably only won because of last minute victories just before election day. The Dems lost the Presidency in the middle of the Korean and Vietnam Wars. For Bush to really ride this thing to 2004, he needed a series of short, small invasions-- Iraq to Columbia to the Phillipines etc. Whether he would have gotten bogged down is an open issue, but he won't find out. His game plan should have had him in Bagdad this summer, but he so mishandled the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that he blew any potential regional support for invading Iraq. And his showdown with Europe over everything from Kyoto to the International Criminal Court means they are unlikely to support it. Bush may think he can go in cowboy style alone, but I don't think he can pull it off without a complete disaster, militarily and electorally...And the bottom line is that Bush is a Political Liar and that is what kills candidates. He made too many cynical promises in 2000 with his "compassionate conservatism" talk that he had no intention of fulfilling--- and the voters will punish him for that as that becomes clearer. "
Bush surprised me a bit by being willing to go into Iraq unilaterally, but the results are as I expected, a disaster both militarily and soon to be electorally.
Nathan
----- Original Message -----
From: mike larkin
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 3:22 PM
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Hotline editor: Kerry in a rout
Nathan Newman <nathanne at nathannewman.org> wrote:
Yep!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Henwood"
To: "lbo-talk"
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 2:38 PM
Subject: [lbo-talk] Hotline editor: Kerry in a rout
Mad Max has made the same argument, although as a math moron, I have no idea what a "non-zero probability" is.
http://maxspeak.org/mt/archives/000390.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20040504/b86c872a/attachment.htm>