Another swing, another miss

April 29, 2005

It’s getting harder and harder for me to accept the conventional wisdom about the brilliant political minds at the Bush White House. Karl Rove & Co. are touted as visionary strategists who can navigate any political waters with their special blend of vision, acuity, and shrewdness. But if these geniuses are so smart, how do you explain last night’s press conference?

Reports surfaced yesterday afternoon that we’d finally start to get some specifics from the president about his Social Security plan. That didn’t happen. In fact, Bush identified the smartest possible course — and did the exact opposite.

Let’s take stock. The White House is losing the Social Security fight badly, Republicans in Congress are panicking, conservatives are looking for an exit strategy, and the more the public hears the president’s pitch the less they like it. Bush responds to this situation by going on prime-time television to announce:

* The private accounts everyone hates are non-negotiable

* He’s cutting Social Security benefits, especially for the middle class

* There’s still no specific plan

This is the plan to right the ship and turn the Social Security debate back in Bush’s favor? I must be missing something because no one’s going for this.

Democrats are ready to pounce on Bush for his plan to index benefits to prices rather than wages, which they say will mean a major benefit cut. “For the first time ever, you’ll see a Social Security solvency plan that is solely based on deep cuts to the middle class,” said Gene B. Sperling, who was President Bill Clinton’s economic adviser.

And conservative Republicans will balk at his call last night for “progressive indexing,” which would reduce future payments for middle- and upper-income retirees by linking increases to prices rather than wages. Stephen Moore, a leading proponent of personal accounts, warned of a “nightmare” in which benefit cuts “cost Republicans the Senate in 2006. He has a clear conundrum right now.”

For four months, Bush’s push for privatization has fallen flat. His approach to cutting benefits through indexing will be even less popular. From a political perspective, it’s as if Bush is saying, “Hope you’ve enjoyed the broccoli for four months; now I have brussel sprouts!”

Maybe Bush wants to lose the debate. Frankly, I can’t think of any other explanation.

Wasn’t the term “medicare benefits”? Or am I just mixing up the budget with the rhetoric?

And what do you mean “there’s still no specific plan”? The Bush plan is to kill social security – or put it on the path towards extinction. The “specifics” are merely tactics to get there. 🙂

I wouldn’t count privatization as “fallen flat” until after the 2006 election cycle–the audience it plays with is the money group, not the public. Bush can afford to poll lowly so long as the elections are a long way away; only if Dems return a majority does it make a difference, and it’s hard to say how potent the next round of Swifties will be.

We’ve won some rounds, but the work remains.

  • I think that the explanation is that Rove’s brilliance requires a compliant news media and public “rallying behind the President”. Bush has lied to the media several times before about “newsbreaking” press conferences or speeches that turn out to simply be a ruse to get prime time coverage. Time and time again, this administration has come out saying their plans do the opposite of what they actually do — and the media has splashed their “black is white” headlines on their frontpage, then drop the subject when they realize they’ve been played for rubes to avoid an embarassing mea culpa. And the public usually put their faith in the man who supposedly saw us through 9/11.

    Rove is sticking with the same tried and true strategy that has worked for him for years. What is amazing is that is suddenly stopped working. Why has everyone finally caught on? I don’t know. But I don’t see the White House acting any differently.

  • Did you catch Bush last night when he said he doesn’t care what the polls say? We the American people are saying we don’t want him destroying social security with his private accounts and he is saying back to us…..tough shit, I’ll do what I want!!

  • Without being a brilliant thinker myself, it appears that part of the Rove strategy involves engaging in “lost cause” partisan wars. This creates a lot of heated rhetoric and helps weld the base together.

    Now, speaking from my gut more than my head here, it would seem that the Social Security thrash is currently aimed at keeping the “smaller government” part of the base onboard. It’s a counterweight to the Schiavo debacle. But Rove may have overplayed his hand.

    Or maybe not. Consider the old proverb, that when the lion and tiger fight over the kill it is the jackal who steals the prey. The bankruptcy bill, drilling in Alaska, cuts in Medicaid…and there’s a real doozy (but one I can’t remember) that may get tacked onto a bill calling for more money for troops. It’s not the ID card…seems to me it was some fiscal thing that is going to further weaken the Democratic base–but I suppose this only works in favor of my argument. The Social Security issue is Machiavellian sleight-of-hand.

    I think Rove’s calculation is that Bush’s legacy is expendable. He’s going to do as much damage as possible now while he can. He’s confident that he can swing public opinion in his direction when elections are upon us. He seems to be a master of “even bad PR is better than no PR at all.”

    And for my anti-robot question I am temtpted to answer “not blue.”

  • What? You don’t think that Bush provided specifics last night?

    The ~Media~ is all over it. They think that what he said WAS specifics. I mean, let’s face it. What Bush said last night was deeper than 98% of the reporters (and ALL the TV faces) have bothered to dig so far.

    I know, I know, you wanted enough specifics so that someone could make a reasonable decision, and he didn’t provide that. He didn’t dare, since all he really wants is to destroy the Social Security program, and if he gave you honest specifics then he would be giving away his (mostly unacceptable) plan to eliminate the program.

    What did you expect?

  • The Rove strategy is to exploit the stupidity and credulity of the media and the public… and the wimpiness of Democrats. Rove falters when people stay on his ass– as we are doing in Blogistan, and as we are starting to force the media to do. For example, we recently shortened the half-life of the “Democrats call it the Nuclear Option” bamboozement dramatically, just by staying on the press and calling in to complain that TRENT FUCKING LOTT coined the term and Repugs have been using it lustily for a few years now. Durbin even went on CNN and said pretty much exactly that. Well done! That works.

    Rove is very, very smart, but he’s only a genius when competing against corporate 90’s DLC-style or wimpy 70’s era love-in Democrats. His shit doesn’t stick to the new-style fightin’ Reform Democrats. It doesn’t take real genius to defeat incompetence. A simple combination of balls, cleverness, and hard work will suffice… and I think that’s where Rove lives.

    Rove is trying to set a trap for Democrats, by trying to position his plan as “progressive”. The 70’s “Let’s be reasonable and bipartisan” Dems would have fallen for it hook, line, and sinker, as would the 90’s “The polls! The polls! What say the polls!” Dems.

    Fuck that. We’ve got Reid, Dean, Pelosi, and Durbin on our side… nice try Karl. And TPM, dKos, and MediaMatters, plus AAR to debunk the bullshit. And cable news coming on line… not a minute too soon.

    These Repugs are toast IFF we continue to fight them. The only danger at this point is complacency. Keep fighting… and keep building institutions that will last well beyond this particular fight, so that we can build a bulwark against this kind of attack in the future.

    • Comments are closed.