Heck, I’m not a Bush ‘hater’ (though I disagree with him on many issues) and I think he screwed the pooch on this one. He lost control of the debate and damaged his political standing by pushing this one before the base was ready to accept it. Even members of his own party aren’t buying the line at a time when they should be ready to.
I think it’s a dead issue with the administration looking for some small change so they can claim victory and move on to other things. Otherwise next year we’re in an election year where if he tries to push it his opponents can say ‘The Republicans want to cut benefits so you have to eat dog food! Vote democratic!’
And if that’s the case we’ll have staunch Republican Congressmen decrying Bush from the pulpits to assure their reelection.
The “great stride” is that the nation is even having the debate at all! It’s gone from a taboo subject to something that is being discussed. I do think Bush is likely to fail in his current attempts. The odds certainly are stacked against him. However, just that he’s been able to get this far is impressive. Social Security is already weakened by his efforts.
It’s unrealistic to expect overnight success when talking about a huge 60 year old government program like this. Over time, conservatives can keep chipping away at it though.
We’ve never had a debate on whether the government should sponsor forced euthanasia for everyone over 25 before, either. Doesn’t mean starting one now would be a “great stride.”
debaser, I point out once again that there is less public support for the notion now than when Bush decided to promote it. Less. The more people think about it, the less they like it. It is less likely to happen now than ever before. Social Security is weakened by his efforts, you say? How? Isn’t the evidence that more people now realize its importance as currently structured? What facts lead you see it as weakened? Hint: I already know you don’t have any.
As a wise man might have said: I know you love Bush. I really get it. You love, love, love him. It would be nice if you at least tried to mask it, though, and attempted to do some thinking before you once again hold Bush to the most unrealistic of standards.
Unrealistically low, that is. But you must know that.
There’s plenty of support among republicans for privatization. I think there’s also plenty of support among younger workers, who are also the ones who will actually be effected by the changes.
You’re dead on here. Bush’s big chance to change Social Security is in between the election cycles.
If we went from not ever having a discussion on forced euthanasia for everyone over 25 to actually having a serious discussion about it and about half the country being in favor of it than it would indeed be a great stride for the forced euthanasia movement.
Those in this poll who thought that SS was the top issue that government should address in the coming year:
11/04 = 1%
1/04 = 3%
2/04 = 5%
If that curve keeps up we’ll be ready for change in approximately 2 years.
Other items on that list:
Health Care = 5%
Economy = 5%
Jobs = 9%
War = 11%
Iraq/ObL = 8%
Terrorism = 6%
Other = 17%
More:
Question 20: Do you have confidence in George W Bush’s ability to make the right decisions about Social Security, or are you uneasy about his approach?
Regardless of how you usually vote, do you think the Republican party or the Democratic party is more likely to make the right decisions about Social Security?
And that’s why the President’s Congressional allies bugged out on him. The public as a whole doesn’t have confidence in the plan (what they’ve seen of it).
I think this says a lot. The amount of people who think SS is the top issue the government should address has increased by 500% due to Bush’s work getting the word out. That seems like a success to me, not a failure.
So, Social Security now is tied with health care and the economy as peoples most important issue? This is up from only 1% caring about it a few short months ago. Again, this is a success, not a failure.
You’re correct here. I have my doubts also as to Bush’s ability to actually do anythng about Social Security. However, I give him credit for at least trying and for at least getting this far.
This doesn’t surprise me. The Democrats are the party of big government. They are obviously the ones most likely to want to grow a huge government entitlement program like Social Security. For the Republicans to be trused on such an issue is an uphill battle.
It’s no different than if you asked who is more trusted in National Defense. The Republicans are clearly the party of a strong military and the results would show it. That doesn’t nessesarily make them right about every issue regarding the military though.
My answer to the OP question is yes. Since the WMDs in this case are not there, and you don’t need either a security clearance or a trip to Iraq to find this out, Bush would get reamed in a real town meeting environment.
Debaser, you are aware that even the Administration now admits that private accounts will not help the solvency of the system, right? That only benefits cuts or tax increases (like raising the cap) will fix the problem? I wonder if he is pushing private accounts out of ideological purity or as misdirection - to keep people from focusing on the cuts also being proposed.
This whole thing is going to make me join AARP now, just as a slap at DeLay.
All I can say is that Bush just rolled through these here parts. The exposure on the local news, the speech, the commericials…oh, people are buying. I don’t know if it’s enough people or the right people; only time will tell.
