Thread: Republicans struggle with the "Bush deficit"

(quote)
Republicans struggle with the "Bush deficit"

GUARDIAN NEWS SERVICE

By Simon Tisdall

Cleaning up after the president

Problems are piling up for US Republicans as they seek a presidential election candidate with the strength and charisma to overcome the "Bush deficit". The choice on offer has failed so far to inspire the party's base. And polls suggest adverse ideological and demographic shifts could confound any future nominee.

George Bush, his approval ratings touching historic lows, cannot run again in 2008. But as one Democratic congressman noted recently, he will still be on the ballot. How they propose to clean up the president's mess, while distancing themselves from the Jonah in the White House, is the primary challenge for would-be Republican successors.

Internal party alienation is deepening. By some estimates, nearly 40% of Republican voters no longer support the Iraq war; 46% of white evangelical Protestants, erstwhile key Bush supporters, now disapprove of the job he is doing. Among all voters, according to a Pew survey last month, only 29% are happy with the president's performance. He fares little better in other polls.

One long-lasting consequence of the Bush meltdown may be a shift away from Republicans by self-described independents - three in every 10 voters. Switches by these non-aligned voters helped the Democrats to win control of Congress last November. The defections may turn into a stampede next year.

Ironically, the blocking of Mr Bush's flagship immigration bill by congressional Republicans has helped to alienate another voter bloc. In 2004, at least 40% of Hispanics - the largest, fastest-growing minority group - backed Mr Bush. Now, by a margin of nearly three to one, they say they will most likely back the Democrats next year, according to a USA Today/Gallup poll. In one notional match-up, Hispanic voters back Hillary Clinton, the New York senator and Democratic frontrunner, over Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor and leading Republican, by 66% to 27%.

Republican problems extend to the candidates themselves, with none having proved themselves capable so far of uniting or enthusing the party faithful.

Disappointing campaign fundraising results tell a story. While the top three Democrats - Ms Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards - have raked in $68.5m in the past three months, the top three Republicans - Mr Giuliani, Mitt Romney and John McCain - have netted $48.7m.

Mr McCain is in particular trouble, having been forced to fire campaign staff for lack of funds.

Despite an improved profile among voters, the gaffe-prone, multimillionaire Mr Romney has been obliged to borrow from himself to keep going. Many wonder whether a Mormon can ever be president - although similar doubts were expressed about the Catholic Jack Kennedy before he won in 1960.

Polls suggest the pro-choice Mr Giuliani is seen as too liberal by conservative Republicans to carry the party's banner. His personal life, and that of his wife, Judi, are also coming under campaign-threatening scrutiny.

This flawed line-up helps to explain the interest currently building around Fred Thompson, a chummy former Tennessee senator, arch-conservative, and well-known television actor who is expected to enter the race soon.

But Ronald Reagan he ain't. Mr Thompson's qualifications for the job, and his ability to reach out to moderates and independents, have yet to be tested. When they are, he may be found lacking. As Politico newspaper columnist Roger Simon has pointed out, Americans picked Mr Bush on the basis of "have-a-beer-and-hang-out" affability, not competence. They will not want to make the same mistake again.

The Democratic field does not lack similar difficulties. Unlike the Republicans, Mr Obama and Ms Clinton have awoken something akin to passion among the party grassroots. Yet Mr Obama remains inescapably what he is - a young, inexperienced, and occasionally faltering prospect whose time has probably not yet come. And Ms Clinton remains a nationally divisive figure with the highest unfavourable ratings of any candidate, averaging around 50%. If that stays unchanged, she could easily win the Democratic nomination - only to prove unelectable in the general election.

In this wide open race the Democratic candidate advancing fastest is, as yet, no candidate at all. Support for Al Gore is up to 34% in the Pew survey, only 10 points behind Ms Clinton, even though the former vice-president says he has no plans to stand. Other polls indicate a similar surge.

The focus until now has been on an all-New York showdown, between Ms Clinton and Mr Giuliani. But perhaps more attention should be paid to Nashville. If Mr Thompson and Mr Gore have anything at all in common, it is Tennessee - the southern state both call home - and the advantages of the dark horse.

(quote)
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/00 ... 070325.htm

Ephesians 4:32

Cleaning up after the president.

This just about sums it all up. Bush, this pathetic fool of a man, has left a terrible mess in his presidential wake.

I find that during the last few weeks Sen.Clinton has been campaigning with Bill in tow,IMO kind of giving the impression that if she can't do something on her own he will help out ,thats kind of sad for a presidential candidate if you ask me.

..and no mention of Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter. Fred Thompson is brought up becuase he's part of the good-'ol-boy group..the CFR. They like him, but not our guys.

I think Duncan Hunter has not only the best chance but an excellent chance. It is strange why they don't include him.

I'm in no mood for a Guiliani.
No mood for Fred Thompson, either. Maybe he's nice, maybe he's good, but I want someone who we KNOW and someone who we can COUNT ON.

(Of course my all time best pick is Senator Jeff Sessions. Do you realize how may people from all parties he could pull in? A lot. Straight-forward, no nonsense type. That's what American wants and needs right now).

Originally Posted by Rockfish

..and no mention of Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter. Fred Thompson is brought up becuase he's part of the good-'ol-boy group..the CFR. They like him, but not our guys.

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." (U. S. Constitution, Article VI, ¶3)

The CFR, not openly but by the direction of its policies, promotes a future one world government founded upon commerce and banking. Revelation 13:1-8 calls this godless entity "the beast" and describes it as against Christ and headed by the antichrist, Satan incarnate.

If the CFR, which follows the lead of the Luciferians, the religion of Satan, must (not officially but in fact) approve presidential candidates, that amounts to a religious imprimatur. Don't expect the courts to support that indictment, but a religious test is what it is.