After Iraq, will the post-war fallout catch up with Bush?

[Sava]

Bush Sr. got voted out in 1992 despite having a high approval rating during and after the first Gulf War. And Bush Sr. had a higher approval rating than Bush Jr. IMO, the Democrats can only lose the election by putting up some other stiff.

Just to put things in perspective, here's a nice Doonesbury piece related to this discussion.

So, let's try to have a civilized discussion about whether or not Bush will get re-elected. Will the post-war fallout affect Dubya like it did his father?

[SlowwHand]

Hell , no, Sava.

His dad bowed to U.N. pressure.
We now have seen that half the U.N. are terrorist-backers.

So, yes. Look for re-election.

[Wtiberon]

I believe he will be re-elected. The economy looks as if it is on a major rebound if so then there will be little or no issues for the democrats to attack with. Also he has the war on terror to keep his approval rating up and we are almost assuredly going to deploy against another nation...possibly Syria...so he will have that as well.

[CerberusIV]

Its the economy, stupid!

Not you personally

If the voters are happy that they have money to spend and a good prospect of jobs then they will vote for the current administration. If not then they will give the other lot a try.

I am not an american but it is more or less the same in any western democracy.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

'Its the economy, stupid!'

yeah, gotta agree with this. we can all suck each other off over the war - weeee it was great!!!

but money is everything. it DOES buy health, happiness and love! so bush better get things back on track to better his chances at another 4.

of course... the dem's dont really have anyone worth voting for right now. that in itself might keep bush around. a sad way to stay - but i'm sure he would take it!

[SlowwHand]

At some point, Bush will need to seek advice on domestic issues, just as he's let the experts advise on foreign activity. IE. Tommy Franks, Colin Powell, etc.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
We now have seen that half the U.N. are terrorist-backers.

Saudi Arabia, Parkistan, Israel, and the US, just for starters.

Originally posted by SlowwHand
So, yes. Look for re-election.

Slowwhand got his fingers jammed in his ears permanently, saying, "Nayh, nayh, I don't hear you."

[JohnT]

Post war fallout didn't knock Bush out in 1992, it was a badly run campaign (remember that Lee Atwater passed away in the summer of '92) and his broken "Read my lips: No New Taxes" pledge.

[Andrew1999]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Hell , no, Sava.

His dad bowed to U.N. pressure.
We now have seen that half the U.N. are terrorist-backers.

So, yes. Look for re-election.

In 1991 everyone thought the UN was great. Because of them we had everyone on the planet except Yemen behind us, a true coalition of the willing. It wasn't until Bush (not Clinton, BUSH) took us on a tour of Somalia that "F*** the UN!" became a popular sentiment.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Look for re-election.

In order to be re-elected, one must be elected in the first place.

[Odin]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


In order to be re-elected, one must be elected in the first place.

Hey, I was going to say that. It's true though.

I won't be suprised if the Democrats say "It's STILL the economy, Stupid."

[yavoon]

i think a lot of the US likes the pro active president that bush is. even the part that doesn't like what he's doing. he is at the very least actively attempting to lead the nation. lots of politicians now often try to bandwagon and poll watch their way to re election so much so that the only pt of being president becomes to stay president.

ie. clinton.

[Sava]

I tend to agree with My Wife Hates Civ, although JohnT, your point is well-taken. Is there anything the Democrats could or will use against Bush? I'm thinking they will focus on the economy and education. "No Children Left Behind"... perhaps they might show how his policy has worsened the public education system.

[chequita guevara]

Conservatives like to forget that Clinton was consistently a popular president. Bush can't claim that. Unemployment stil hovers near 6%, the economy had zero growth last quarter and shows little sign of getting better. Bush has a year to turn the economy around.

[Wtiberon]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Conservatives like to forget that Clinton was consistently a popular president. Bush can't claim that. Unemployment stil hovers near 6%, the economy had zero growth last quarter and shows little sign of getting better. Bush has a year to turn the economy around.

For all his faults Clinton was a very good president and did hold high approval ratings however they were not as high as Bush enjoys now. Bush has broken records for highest approval ratings so I'm not sure what your are refering to that Bush can't claim that. Unemployment is a result of the economy not one man...the economy is a complex and very fragile system and he is doing as much as he can to recover from two major trajedies: 9/11 and the Corporate scandals. I think that as long as Bush makes improvements (however small) and the economy does not fall further back he will be re-elected.