Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lawdog who wrote (42439)	10/4/2000 11:28:07 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 769667

I have read Jake Weisberg for years, as a subscriber to The New Republic. He is smart, and a decent writer, but he was also one of the most partisan guys on the magazine. Suffice it to say that I disagree with his assessment of how the debate went. I think your thesis is interesting. I also think you continue to underestimate Bush and his team. This was like sizing up the opponent for both camps. Also, you assume too much vulnerability on issues like abortion. Bush will not per se impose a litmus test, although the sort of judges he will appoint will likely overturn Roe. What then? It will go back to the states, and many states will, for the foreseeable future, have liberal abortion regimes. If pro- choicers are so sure the public is on their side, they have nothing to fear. As it stands, roughly 40 t0 45 % of women are pro- life, and over 75% of the electorate is against PBAs. The intensity of feeling among pro- lifers is stronger than among pro- choicers, and they are likelier to be one issue voters. You also underestimate Gore's vulnerability. On foreign policy, the contrast between peace- making and peace- keeping has a great deal of resonance (we were supposed to be out of Bosnia years ago), and nation- building, well, Haiti is the prime case of that---- the prime basket case. On domestic policy, there is still a lot of resistance to expanding federal oversight of the country, and Gore is proposing lots and lots and lots of new spending. Plus, there is a lot of resonance in the point that they have been there for almost 8 years. If you blame the Congress, than why not admit that the Congress set the agenda in toto, and therefore credit them with the economy and welfare reform. If you take credit for these things, why couldn't you get other initiatives through? Finally, if Gore gets aggressive, well, Bush has only to ask if the public wants 4 more years of scandal. The answer, of course, is no...........