Only reason I could imagine him winning a third time is the only reason I could imagine him winning the first or second times: The guy running against him wasn’t so hot neither.
If you got someone running who people would actually want as a president–Bush would be out in two seconds from the other guy announcing he was running.
Why did the Democrats nominate Senator Kerry, given that your claim about his dislikability is correct?
I didn’t say likeable, I said someone who would want as a president.
As to why they voted for him, my guess would be that:
- He volunteered
- Enough voting Democrats liked him as a person
- His hair was sufficiently grey
But I couldn’t say for certain. From the vantage point of the mass public, however, we had the choices of:
- Keeping the (admittedly not impressive) guy in who is midway through the occupation and rebuilding of Iraq
- Inserting some other guy to take care of it–but who is bluffing around that one topic so much that one must suspect his intentions aren’t something he would want to make public before being elected
Not great options so far as I was concerned. And the two 50%-50% ties between Dems and Reps in the last two elections seems to back up the idea that the non-partiers were similarly lukewarm on their options.
It all depends on whom you put against Bush… anyone but Kerry would do the trick. Iraq is wearing away at Bush’s reputation.
Now one could naturally claim that if there were a third term possibility that republicans and others wouldn’t be so divisive like they are now. Bush wouldn’t have done some stuff either. Some of the flak that Bush has taken wasn’t from democrats.
What boom?
Annie-Xmas is getting kicked out into Homelessness, unemployment is high, wages low & getting worse, national debt skyrocketing, & trade inbalance is threatening the foundations of the Republic.
What boom? 
Is his reputation that much worse now than it was six months ago? It probably is worse, but not a lot. I think this is one of those cases where untried alternatives just look better because you don’t know how they would have turned out. Gore and Kerry both couldn’t beat Bush - or not by enough, however you want to look at it - so maybe he’s not that inept a campaigner.
I had no idea that Annie’s situation was an economic indicator.
In my little slice of the world, companies are spending lots of money on capital equipment in anticipation of huge business opportunities. This type of spending usually leads a positive cycle in the economy. Things, from a business standpoint, are looking great for the next twelve to eighteen months in my sector which is commercial, not government/military.
Haj
After watching Bill Clinton on Larry King last night, I would have to surmise that he would be a very easy winner over Bush. Side by side, people would see the difference between someone who can actually think and has workable ideas with someone who can’t form a sentence coherently without Carl Rove telling him what to say.
Bush would get creamed.
I dunno, I have a very funny feeling about Bill Clinton lately–he may not be long for this world.
To me, the question is impossible to answer without knowing who the opponent is. There’s just too many variables. Right now, I think he’d win–people aren’t going to change their opinions on abortion, gay marriage, or the War in Iraq because of Terri Schiavo.
If this were the Pit, I could make some suggestions as to what you can do with your insular little Corporate slice of the world.
Other than mocking the plight of another Doper, & displaying a cruel indifference to the fate of your fellow man that comes across as markedly abnormal, you have addressed nothing in my Post. Would you care to, hmmm? :dubious:
I don’t think that Bush won the 2000 election, there are serious issues with the 2004 election, so based on past performance, if Bush COULD go for another term, I think he would be President. Whether he could get ELECTED President or not is another issue entirely.
Would Bush win a third election? He didn’t win his first two, why start now? Could he steal a third one? Quite possibly. What has changed since November? The public is a little less supportive of Iraqalypse. Bush came out with a privatization scheme for Social Security with no actual details, all the while his apologists condemn the Dems for not coming up with a detailed alternate. The economy isn’t a whole lot different than it was last fall. Some friction has emerged between the religious right and the rational right regarding Terry Schiavo and stem cell research. So I don’t see a lot that would gain Bush votes, but perhaps some things that would cost him votes. The election would likely be much closer, but still within the range where dirty tricks could prevail.
I’m a self employed consulting engineer. The bulk of my clients are small companies with less than fifty employees. These companies are located all over the U.S. with a few international clients as well. In brief, they come to me with a problem and I recommend equipment for them to purchase and then train their engineers and techs on how to use it. I haven’t worked for a large corporation since 1998.
The little guys are investing in expensive equipment in larger numbers than they have in years. They’re starting to hire and are having trouble finding people. It’s my understanding that the unemployment data has been very postive of late by the way. Where do you get that “unemployment is high?” Almost all of my clients are wondering how they are going keep up. Two years ago it was wondering how they can retain their staff.
There are more things that I am seeing that lead me to believe that a boom is coming. I spend a lot of time on airplanes and over the last several months, they’ve gotten more and more full. It’s been ages since I’ve been on a half empty plane and the last few times I’ve flown, the planes were totally full.
I honestly believe that we’re in for a couple of years of good economic times and another bull market.
Don’t get me wrong, this thread is about GWB and I can’t stand his administration. Don’t try to put me in his camp.
Haj
I’ve been out of work for nearly six months. Before that, my (very good) job was taken over by an Indian company. (Incidentally, the Indian company is now gone and there are rumours that the company is going to be sold or will go public.) Since I’ve been unemployed I’ve sent out résumés several times a week, every week. No joy. I’ve received several e-mails stating that the positions I’ve applied for have been cancelled.
Annie’s situation may not be an economic indicator, and mine may not be; but remember that there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people like us. Taken in toto, I think it does add up to an economic indicator.
I think that if a million jobs had not been outsourced, supported by the Administrations policy that outsourcing is ‘good for the country’ (IMO, it’s good for the profits of large corporations, and not for the People), people like Annie and me would be in better economic situations.
My situation might improve. A friend wants me to become a partner in his business once we relocate back to L.A. But a lot of things can happen between now and then. I’ll be sweating until it actually happens.
Unemployment claims rose by 25,000 last week alone.
Isn’t that sometimes considered a positive since it means a greater number of people are looking for work? I don’t know how a lot of these things function.
Isn’t that normal at this time of year with college students and grads looking for jobs?
I don’t think people just out of college immediately file for unemployment.
Yes, but how have the numbers been over the last two years? Take a look: http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref2. While they are no where near the lows during the Clinton years, they have gone down steadily since mid-2003 which, to me, indicates a boom.
Haj
The same could be said for Bush’s last two presidential election opponents.
Moral of the story: Never underestimate the power of the Dark side of the Rove.