If there’s one iron-clad rule of the punditocracy, it’s this: once everyone agrees on a controversial point, it’s time to write the opposite. For example, the entire political world now agrees that George W. Bush is the least popular president in a generation, overseeing a disaster in Iraq, and will find it next to impossible to advance any kind of far-right agenda through a Democratic Congress over the next two years.
This means, of course, that’s it’s time for the cunning pundit to step up and talk about a Bush resurgence. Enter David Broder.
It may seem perverse to suggest that, at the very moment the House of Representatives is repudiating his policy in Iraq, President Bush is poised for a political comeback. But don’t be astonished if that is the case.
Like President Bill Clinton after the Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994, Bush has gone through a period of wrenching adjustment to his reduced status. But just as Clinton did in the winter of 1995, Bush now shows signs of renewed energy and is regaining the initiative on several fronts.
More important, he is demonstrating political smarts that even his critics have to acknowledge.
I like to consider myself a fairly level-headed Bush critic, but I’m afraid these “smarts” that I’m supposed to acknowledge elude me.
As proof, Broder pointed to the president’s handling of today’s House vote on a resolution criticizing the Bush escalation strategy in Iraq. “First, [Bush] argued that the House was at odds with the Senate…. Second, he minimized the stakes in the House debate by endorsing the good motives of his critics…. And third, by contrasting today’s vote on a nonbinding resolution with the pending vote on funding the war in Iraq, he shifted the battleground to a fight he is likely to win.”
Let’s take these one at a time.
First, the House is not at odds with the Senate; the Senate likes what the House is doing so much, Harry Reid is holding a vote on an identical resolution tomorrow. Dems on both sides of the Hill are, for a change, on the same page.
Second, Bush may have graciously acknowledged that Dems are not terrorist sympathizers, but a) that’s setting the bar awfully low; and b) the president is playing good-cop-bad-cop with his press secretary, who’s been saying for two weeks that Dems are “emboldening” the enemy. That’s not an example of political “smarts”; it’s an example of political cynicism.
And third, Broder seems confident that Bush will “win” when Congress passes funding for the war. It’s far more likely that congressional Dems may attach a few strings to the money, setting up a massive confrontation with the White House.
If there’s a sign of a comeback here, it’s hiding well. Indeed, only the DC pundit class could look at a key vote in which the president is going to get creamed by a bi-partisan majority, and say, “See? He’s regained his footing.”
Broder went on to insist that, in addition to his handling of the vote he’s certain to lose, the president “has been impressive in recent days.” He gave a speech to congressional Dems, he gave a few media interviews, and he went after Iran through innuendo, instead of directly. “All this is to the good,” Broder says.
The problem here is a familiar one: the soft bigotry of low expectations. Broder has, unfortunately, grown accustomed to watching a detached, arrogant president, who prefers to stay in a bubble and talk exclusively to those with whom he already agrees. Recently, for political purposes, the president has ventured out of the bubble, albeit briefly, to respond to questions from reporters and Dems. The answers weren’t particularly candid, of course, and the president simply repeated his well-rehearsed talking points. The effort was a half-hearted charade intended to impress people like … David Broder.
There’s no comeback here. Bush is still dreadful unpopular, he’s still responsible for a nightmare in Iraq, and he’s still largely opposed to a popular agenda embraced by congressional Dems.
Broder appears to be challenging the conventional wisdom just for the sake of challenging the conventional wisdom. It’s pretty weak.