Seven Card Stud: 7 Reasons Not to Fear for Bush in November

February 20, 2004

By Daniel M. Ornelas

 

1. The Terror Factor: Let us begin with what we know best: George W. Bush is a consummate wartime president. September 11th put a heavy burden on the administration to go out into the world, hunt down, and destroy the terrorists and the regimes that harbor them. It was not an enviable position to be in, since the American people have a historical aversion to interventionism abroad, especially in the post-Vietnam era. However, the 9/11 attacks have changed the security calculus for many an American voter, most especially independents. No longer do our oceans offer protection from foreign threats; no more are our cities immune to the specter of terrorism. If nothing else, Bush can run on the platform that he, and he alone, can keep the nation safe. Even Democrats have to admit that when it comes to national security, they will lose a head to head contest with the President. And if, as in the opinion of some of the top military brass, Osama bin Laden is caught or killed this year, there will be little contest at all.

 

2. Iraq Attack: The capture of Saddam Hussein was cause for euphoria at the end of last year. Bush's approval numbers soared, the television pundits praised, and the Democrats did little else but congratulate ÒDubyaÓ on a job well done (the exception being Dean, who was not entirely sure HusseinÕs capture was for the better). While no actual weapons of mass destruction have been found to date, one need only look at the tens of thousands lying in mass graves to realize that we have already found the deadliest weapon in the desert: Saddam himself. I know, Bush assured the nation that the WMD were there, however, this will not come back to haunt him because the Democrats, including John Kerry, John Edwards, and Bill Clinton, were right at his side with the WMD accusation. Recent evidence found linking Iraq and al-Qaeda only makes it less likely that the Democrats will desire to make an issue of Gulf War II.

 

3. Over Budget, About Time: No self-respecting Republican laments the Bush spending binge more than I, but let us be pragmatic. ÒDubyaÓ never ran on a platform that promised minimal spending increases and never foresaw the recession brought on at the end of the Clinton term and the aftermath of September 11th. His expensive education bill, his prescription drug packages, and his military budget expansion were all promised before he was elected, and conservatives voted for him all the same. This puts Bush in great company, because the last GOP president to face this severe a budget crisis before an election was reelected. Indeed, Reagan won in the landslide in 1984, despite his spending about 7% of GDP on military expenses, an amount twice that for what Bush is currently allowing. Besides this, the economy is growing again, and we may well grow our way out of the deficit.

 

4. Economics 101: In case you missed it, the stock markets hit a two and half year high last week. Not that this, in and of itself, insures Bush's reelection, but it is typical of a growing economy. An additional 100,000 jobs were created last month, interest rates remain low, and worker productivity is at an all time peak. While some may argue that the higher unemployment rate will be a detriment to Bush's chances, I assert that job growth is a, if not the, lagging indicator of economic health. In fact, one of the only things that could stifle the growth of the past year is a rollback of the Bush tax cuts. Here again, we see an issue that finds Democrats impotent. How does a candidate run on a platform of raising taxes? Ask Walter Mondale: you do not.

 

5. Adam and Steve: The recent ruling from the Massachusetts Supreme Court virtually demanded that the state recognize homosexual marriages. While this judicial victory has been a cause for celebration in the gay community, for their Democratic Party overlords it was indeed a bittersweet victory they would rather not have had. The ultimate truth of American politics is that cultural liberals are unelectable (see McGovern, Dukakis, possibly Howard Dean). Now the Democrats are backed into a corner: support gay marriage and lose the support of culturally conservative battleground states like Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania; or oppose it and alienate homosexual constituency groups and their campaign dollars. Either way, Bush wins.

 

6. Sweetness: Let us assume that the above reasons still are not enough to ease Bush to another victory. What else could simultaneously give ÒDubyaÓ a boost and cause Democrats to make a run for the (Canadian) border? Her name is Condoleeza Rice. Imagine the scenario: an ailing Dick Cheney steps down from the vice presidency for health reasons and rides off into the Wyoming sunset. After a long ÔshortÕ search, a new candidate is found right in the White House's backyard. Rice, an articulate and keen intellectual with a knack for winning hearts with her beautiful mind, is nominated. Consequences? Massive hemorrhages in core Democratic constituencies of African-Americans, women, and possibly pianists. The Golden State, with its newfound GOP action-figure governor, and its 54 electoral votes, must then be declared "in play". An already beleaguered DNC treasury would then be forced to start spending money in the most expensive market in the nation. Meanwhile, the Democratic candidates themselves can only sit back, nominate another white male for VP (Edwards or Clark), and watch as the Republican Party again elevates a well-deserving African-American to the next level.

 

7. Sigh: Democrats have not learned their lesson: do not nominate someone whom people do not like. So simple, yet in 2000 they managed to find a man who, despite having all the odds in his favor, managed during the debates to estrange himself from the public by acting like a pompous spoiled brat who was somehow entitled to the presidency. This year is no different. None of the Democratic contenders have any new ideas or warm smiles; they are driven out of sheer unadulterated hatred for George W. Bush and everything for which he stands. Fortunately, hate does not win elections. No matter how hard Republicans tried during the 1990s, they could not "hate" Bill Clinton out of office. The same will hold true in this new millennium. Hate cannot raise money either. This should be abundantly clear to the DNC right now by just how far behind they are in fundraising when compared to the President, somewhere in the neighborhood of $100,000,000. So fear not, friends of Bush, and hate not. Victory is in the cards.