In 2000, Bush was going to be a “uniter,” not a divider. He was going to “change the tone” in DC, work with Democrats, and deliver the kind of above-the-fray presidency everyone’s always wanted.
That … didn’t quite happen. Shortly after Bush came in second but became president anyway, Matthew Dowd started analyzing election data and determined that the center was quickly disappearing. The key to political success, he said, was to govern via polarization. Dowd insisted that Bush and Rove give up on striving for consensus, and instead tear the country in half. As long as the GOP’s chunk was larger than the Dems’, everything would be fine.
After finding some success with this strategy for a few cycles, the plan faltered. Bush’s popularity tanked and Republicans lost both chambers.
And wouldn’t you know it, now Bush wants to be friendly again.
The meal was fit for a queen: caviar, Dover sole almondine and spring lamb. The setting was no less impressive: the upstairs residence of the White House, with its unrivaled vista of the National Mall.
“It’s not Crawford,” President George W. Bush told his guests, referring to the dusty central Texas town where he owns a ranch. “But if you can’t be in Texas, what a view!”
As Representative Chet Edwards, a Texas Democrat, admired the scenery, he said later, he was struck by his presence at the April 17 dinner — his first such invitation from Bush.
Only 20 months before the end of his term, Bush has begun a cross-party charm offensive that many had expected at the dawn rather than the twilight of his presidency. His aim is to make bipartisan progress on a few big issues — such as an overhaul of immigration laws — before he leaves office.
See? Bush just wants to get along with the “Democrat Party.” It would be the height of cynicism to think the president is insincere, and that perhaps political expedience might have something to do with his suddenly-friendly attitude. Heaven forbid. The more intuitive answer is that it just took six-and-a-half years for the president to warm up to the other side of the aisle.
Yeah, that’s it.
For some reason, Dems seem suspicious.
“If he’d reached out more than he did in the past six years, when he didn’t need us, I think it would be a little more genuine, a little more believable and a little more helpful to him,” said Arkansas Representative Mike Ross, co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of self-described conservative Democrats. Ross was among 14 House Democrats who met with Bush on May 8.
“It’s pretty late in the day,” said Senator Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat and the Budget Committee chairman. “I don’t think it’s going to make a difference.”
Frankly, there’s no reason it should. First, this “charm offensive” seems to be about style, not substance. Showing congressional Dems around the residence is a nice pleasantry, but genuine outreach would be reflected in policy. So far, it hasn’t.
Second, the “charm” seems to end at dinner parties. The president is still thumbing his nose at congressional Dems with recess appointments and a scandal-plagued Justice Department. Bush wants to establish some goodwill on the Hill? Dinner invitations aren’t going to cut it.
And third, it’s comically too late. The president has burned every bridge, his approval rating hovers at or below 30%, he has no policy agenda to speak of, and attention has already shifted to the 2008 campaign — in which Republican candidates are afraid to say his name in public.
Many lawmakers, Edwards among them, have left the executive mansion wondering why Bush waited this long to begin courting Democrats, an art he honed during six years as Texas governor.
As governor, Bush needed Dems — they held a majority in Austin. As president, he didn’t need Dems — they were a speed bump in the way of Karl Rove’s “permanent Republican majority.”
It’s funny how things work out, isn’t it?