The elephant in the GOP’s room

May 3, 2007

I was doing some research recently on presidential primary debates and came across a transcript of a Democratic event from September 2003. Reading over the candidates’ remarks, the only name that came up as often as George W. Bush was his immediate predecessor.

John Kerry said, “We can have the deficit cut in half the way Bill Clinton did it.” Joe Lieberman said Clinton “transformed” the party in 1992. Kerry added, “No president can shut the door to globalization and no president should. President Clinton traded. We created 23 million jobs in the 1990s.” Carol Mosley Braun chimed in, “When Bill Clinton became president, we balanced the budget and created jobs and had this country on a good economic foot and the people were doing well.” Dick Gephardt reminded the audience, “I led the fight for the Clinton economic program in 1993.”

Eventually, it seemed Al Sharpton couldn’t take it anymore. “I know that within the next hour we’ll say that Bill Clinton walked on water,” he said.

Democratic candidates wanted voters to know that they’re proud of the Clinton legacy. With that in mind, will this year’s Republican field be similarly anxious to embrace the Bush legacy? Not so much.

As they gather Thursday night at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library for their first debate, the Republican presidential candidates are thrilled at the chance to associate themselves with Reagan. But they may not be able to escape the challenge created for them by the current president.

As much as Iraq or health care or any other issue, the question of how to deal with President Bush is vexing the Republican field. Do they embrace him as a means of appealing to the conservative voters who tend to decide Republican primaries? Or do they break from him in an effort to show that they will lead the nation in a new direction? Do they applaud his policies or question his competence — or both? […]

It is hardly a coincidence that none of the Republican presidential candidates have appeared in any high-profile public settings with Mr. Bush in recent months.

The dilemma couldn’t have happened to a more appropriate group of people.

My suspicion is that GOP candidates will hem and haw, but ultimately identify themselves as mildly-enthusiastic Bush backers. They probably won’t have a choice — about 25% of Americans are convinced that George W. Bush is a conquering hero and the great leader for our times, and they’re the ones voting in the Republican primaries.

Indeed, going back to the bizarre speech Bush gave yesterday to the Associated General Contractors of America, those far-right sycophants hung on the president’s every word. When it came time for a Q&A, they asked questions like “How we can we pray for you?” and thanked Bush for “keeping my family and also the families of America safe for the past five years.” These guys don’t want a Republican nominee who’s going to distance himself from Bush; these guys want four more years.

In fact, earlier this week, the WaPo ran a front-page item about how the Republican base has made it quite clear it will tolerate no dissent from the GOP line.

With public opinion tilting firmly toward ending U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq, Rep. Wayne T. Gilchrest (R-Md.) might have expected praise for his votes that would start to bring the troops home. Instead, at town hall meetings on the Eastern Shore, the former Marine and Vietnam combat veteran has been called a coward and a traitor.

After Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) voted for a nonbinding resolution opposing President Bush’s troop increases, reaction in his district was so furious that local GOP officials all but invited a primary challenge to the reliable conservative.

Are McCain, Giuliani, Romney, & Co. going to be so bold as to denounce Bush directly? Of course not. They’re going to praise the president, demonstrate the kind of loyalty the GOP base expects, and then hope no one remembers the compliments by the time the general election rolls around.

Yesterday, Mitt Romney personally called Bush to thank him for vetoing the Dems’ popular war-funding bill.”On the eve of this debate, it says we’re not running from this guy at all,” said a Romney adviser.

I just hope Dems are taking notes — all of this may prove helpful in 2008.

It will be interesting to see their views on Bush, but, I just don’t think I can deal with watching them tonight.

Will someone please watch for me and report back tomorrow?

  • It’s sad to think there are people in the world so unquestioningly trusting that you could call them over, and poke out their eye with a piece of wire. Then, when they screamed and ran away, you could make soothing noises, maybe, “come on, come here, I was just messing with you” and then poke out the other.

    That pretty much describes the core voters of Republican primaries as discussed above. They still believe the big payday is coming with Bush – that America will control the Middle East’s oil resources, that the violence will subside at least to a level that people stop talking about it, and that the countries who get that look on their face like they smell something bad when you say “American” will have to return, shuffling their feet and cap in hand, to ask for forgiveness. At bottom they’re just people, too, so you have to feel sorry for them a little.

  • Right away, we need to hear the GOP hopefuls state whether they will continue Bush’s anti-Republican (that is, against the Republic) policies: the imperial presidency, politicization of agencies, taking too many damn vacations, etc. It’s too easy to get stuck in the old model of left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative. Let’s take that as given: the Republican candidate will be conservative (unless it’s Rudy). We can live with that. We can’t live with a continuation of Bush’s arrogant rulership.

    In fairness, the Democratic candidates should make their positions on this question clear, too. If they’re afraid of talking about ideological issues — and they don’t have to be — they can talk all day about how they would conduct themselves as president.

  • I saw somewhere that there will be 9 candidates on stage!
    Wow.
    Good for them.
    They are a big tent party.
    I suspect every race and gender will be well-represented.

    Like the name says:

  • Also, I meant to mention the possibility that “how can we pray for you?” was not a softball question at all. Given the sickening ass-kissing on display, it probably was – but if I just turned out a leadership performance that was the inspirational equivalent of a puke milkshake, and the audience inquired how they could pray for me, it would only add to that just-shit-myself feeling. Of course, I’m not George Bush, who is probably more out of his head than Jimi Hendrix was.

  • It’s baffling to me. I know Republicans and conservatives who are likely to vote for whoever their party nominates next year–but nobody who thinks Bush is doing even a semi-competent job, let alone a good one. If anything, the righties I know are disgusted and angry with Bush for making all of them look bad. How dense do you have to be to actually believe he’s doing a good job?

    I see the objections to calling these people “fascists,” but there’s no question in my mind that this kind of unquestioning support, devoid of all analytical thought, is what enables fascism. They really are the Zombie Army, desperate to feast on liberals’ brains.

  • Phoebes wrote: “Will someone please watch for me and report back tomorrow?”

    I’m thinking of watching it just for the entertainment value. I was thinking of turning it into a drinking game with a shot after every mention of 9/11, but with Giuliani on stage I would be hospitalized after his opening statement.

  • “In fact, earlier this week, the WaPo ran a front-page item in which the Republican base has made it quite clear it will tolerate no dissent from the GOP line.”

    And geniuses like David Broder wonder about the cause of bipartisanship being thought of as a dirty word.

  • I remember bringing this up awhile back – but I think this is a problem where the lateness of the GOP convention is going to bite them in the butt. There’s no way that they can’t devote at least one night of the Convention to GWB-worship – and that image – and will there be a repudiation of GWB by the nominee in his acceptance speech? – is going to hang over the campaign just as people are getting seriously ramped up to think about the election -considering that the convention doesn’t even begin until Labor Day.

    Back in the bad old days when the conventions were in June or July, the nominees at least had the remaining part of the summer to put distance between themselves and the Convention if they needed to (and in 1968, if only the Demo Convention had been one week earlier!). But now, with the GOP Convention already in the campaign “season”, it’s going to be hard for the GOP to cleanse their palatte of their GWB problem.

  • Mark: I meant to mention the possibility that “how can we pray for you?” was not a softball question at all.

    Especially if the question is read as: “I used to pray for you all the time, but now… I don’t know how I can do it anymore.”

  • They will all twitter and tweet like a bunch of little canaries in a cage, for fear that “Das Base” will fling them into the monoxide-filled coalmine. The problem is, however, that Das Base is already IN that coalmine—and with a bit of luck, we’ll be able to bulldoze the wretched thing shut in about 18 months….

  • Re the Bush praying theme that has appeared on a few threads:

    Someone yesterday wrote that Bush doesn’t pray.
    Implying, of course, he is a fraud.

    A day or two before I had seen this clip from the recent Bill Moyers documentary.

    Check it out.
    At the end he claims to pray everyday.
    If is one of the most blatantly false moments you will ever see.
    The guy is lying through his teeth.
    Even bad poker players can see that….

  • #4 ROTFLMLiberalAO – Not 9, but 10 old white males will take the stage today:

    Guiliani
    McCain
    Romney
    Brownback
    Tancredo
    Paul (???)
    Hunter
    Huckabee
    Gilmore
    Thompson (Tommy)

  • The Big 3 and the 7 dwarves – but of course no one in the MSM will dare characterize them that way

  • “Someone yesterday wrote that Bush doesn’t pray”.- ROTFLMLiberalAO

    but Bush does prey.

    It can be truly said that “preying” is the foundation of Bush’s presidency.

  • I expect a full evening of “I’m the most like Reagan.” “No you’re not, I am!” “No, I am!” “ME ME ME!” “I think we should elevate Ronald Reagan to sainthood!” “St. Ronnie, St. Ronnie, St. Ronnie!” “No, not sainthood… GODHOOD! In the name of the Father, the Son, and Ronald Reagan!”
    Ad nauseum.

  • gg, thanks for taking on the onerous task of watching the debate for me and reporting back on it. You WILL get your just rewards, either here or in the hereafter.

    Actually, I usually watch Bush’s pressers for their entertainment value. I’m hoping that each presser is the time when Bush finally wigs out completely and I can say that I saw it live. Hasn’t happened yet, but I’m still hoping.

  • It could be that in the general election, Rs hope to make Dems run against the ghost of their beloved Reagan and not against Bush.

  • With Tweety asking the questions, “The Commander guy” might not come up as a subject that often, especially for Rudy and McCain.

  • Ten candidates is too many. Let’s merge some of them:

    McCredo
    GilPaul
    Romniani
    Hucka-back
    and Hunter Thompson

    They can debate as tag-teams.

  • I for one am looking forward to the frenzied follies of this fundamentally flawed field of fetid candidates. Damn, these guys know how to offer entertaining TV. -Kevo

  • The Republicans will have to stay loyal to their hardcore 30% because they own the party. And the views of that 30% are pissing off the remaining 70% of America these days. Let them keep marginalizing themselves to the benefit of the Democrats. If they stay on this road they should be headed for minor party status.

  • Oh Jesus; I think the elephant in the room just farted because SOMETHING smells like shit.

  • For what it’s worth… in spite of Bush and all the “marginalizing” and “frenzied follies” on the right, I saw a poll the other day that had Rudy beating Clinton 49-40 in a heads-up. In the end, it’s the one-on-one match-up that’ll make the difference.

    • Comments are closed.