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: calgal who wrote (474131)	10/10/2003 10:15:12 AM
From: calgal	Respond to of 769670

Lost in Translation Democrats think the recall revolution was about incumbents and the economy. Their reaction last night suggests they're in for a surprise in 2004. by Hugh Hewitt 10/08/2003 8:07:00 AM Hugh Hewitt, contributing writer WITHIN MINUTES of the release of exit polls from California last night, Democrats had wheeled as one and began the hopeless attempt to spin the disastrous verdict. Senator Dianne Feinstein led the charge, but the refrain echoed throughout the party: This was a verdict on Davis's handling of the budget, a handling very similar to the fiscal mismanagement on the national level. Howard Dean had the message on his website 18 minutes after the polls closed: "Today's recall election in California was not about Gray Davis or Arnold Schwarzenegger. This recall was about the frustration so many people are feeling about the way things are going. . . . Tonight the voters in California directed their frustration with the country's direction on their incumbent governor. Come next November, that anger might be directed at a different incumbent . . . in the White House." This delusional spin is great news for Republicans across the country. Gray Davis was booted from office because he imposed a massive tax hike on all California drivers while fecklessly allowing illegal aliens to get drivers' licenses. Davis was all Clinton-Carville when it came to the politics of personal destruction, and he didn't bother to disguise his total dependence on Sacramento's iron triangle of special interests: Indian gambling, trial lawyers, and public employee unions. All of which is obvious. But when Democrats reflexively reject even the obvious conclusions, they demonstrate a capacity for political suicide reminiscent of Britain's Labour party in the late '70s and early '80s. The refusal of Dean and other senior Democrats to understand Tuesday's vote is an almost certain indication of electoral disaster ahead. AMERICANS are taxed too much, and lied to too often. The party of Clinton and McAuliffe remains addicted to trash politics, deceitful tactics, and lawyers' tricks--whether in the courtrooms of Florida or the Ninth Circuit. Disgust with the Democratic party's entire approach to politics is palpable, but Democrats have set their faces against it and now cling to a vision of higher taxes wrapped around incessant America-bashing. Arnold surfed the wave of voter anger into office, and needs only do what he promised to do: Repeal the car tax via executive order. Speak plainly and often about special interest domination of Sacramento. Revoke the drivers' license bill, and push through genuine workers' comp reform. He does need to keep conservatives close. They protected his right flank in the election, and need only to be recognized as a significant part of the governing coalition. For example, when Justice Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court is confirmed to the U.S. Court of Appeals of the D.C. Circuit, Arnold should nominate a principled and credential conservative like my colleague John Eastman. With a few high profile appointments, Arnold will solidify the GOP behind him. The first time he leaves the state to campaign and raise money on behalf of a GOP candidate for a U.S. Senate seat, even McClintock die-hards will recognize the wisdom of supporting Arnold. And when George W. Bush next arrives in the Golden State, to be greeted by Governor Schwarzenegger and thousands of energized volunteers, Democrats may finally begin to understand that willful avoidance of facts changes neither the facts nor the political dynamics that flow from them. Hugh Hewitt is the host of The Hugh Hewitt Show, a nationally syndicated radio talkshow, and a contributing writer to The Daily Standard. His new book, In, But Not Of, has just been published by Thomas Nelson.

To: calgal who wrote (474131)	10/10/2003 10:17:07 AM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Is California Golden for Bush? The Democratic spin is that recall was bad for Bush, but a look at the numbers suggests otherwise. by Fred Barnes 10/10/2003 7:50:00 AM Fred Barnes, executive editor WHEN POLITICAL OPERATIVES TALK, they have three options. They can tell the truth. They can spin, which means twisting the truth. Or they can indulge in absolutely laughable spin they don't believe for even a nanosecond but put out anyway. The claim by Democrats that the recall of Gray Davis spells trouble for President Bush in 2004 falls into this third category. Democrats argue the recall signals incumbents are vulnerable, especially the man responsible for the state of the economy, the president. But the exit poll in the recall election found California voters easily distinguished between Davis and Bush. The survey found that only 27 percent of Californians approved of Davis's handling of his job as governor, while 72 percent disapproved. Bush did much better: 49 percent approved of his performance as president and 48 percent disapproved. Bush's numbers are actually good news for 2004. His standing in California is only a tad worse that his national poll numbers. And since he's probably at the bottom of the third year slump that besets nearly every president, chances are his popularity with California voters will improve between now and the November 2004 election. So, at worst, Bush will be competitive in California, which he wasn't in 2000 when Al Gore won the state by 12 points without campaigning there at all. Now Democrats will have to pay attention to California in 2004, instead of taking the state for granted. Of course there are other reasons why the fall of Davis and rise of Arnold Schwarzenegger bodes well for Bush and Republicans. Democrats say voter anger is aimed at politicians in general, not just Davis. But the anger at Bush is limited to Democrats and liberals. And in California, it wasn't only Republicans who voted to boot Davis, but a majority of independents and a quarter of Democrats. Worse for Democrats, the two Republican candidates for governor, Schwarzenegger and state senator Tom McClintock, got about 60 percent of the total vote. How in the world could that be an ominous sign for Bush? And there's more. Schwarzenegger not only outpolled Davis, though they ran on separate ballot questions. He got more votes than Davis did when he was re-elected in 2002. One complaint voters had about Davis was his tax hikes, most recently a tripling of the car tax. But Bush is a tax cutter. Democrats insist he has slashed taxes too much. Fine, but it makes no sense that voters revolting against tax increases will now turn to rebelling against tax cuts. Finally, there's the war in Iraq. Bush won the military campaign and is struggling to establish a secure Iraq with a viable democratic government. His Iraq policy has strong critics, but at least he won the war. True, it's a bit of a stretch to say Davis went to war with energy producers. But let's compare that to Bush's war nonetheless. Davis lost the energy war, sticking Californians with the task of paying for long-term energy deals in which the cost of energy is far higher than the current price. One final thing. It's true both Davis and Bush confront large budget deficits. Bush, however, has credible excuses for his--the economic downturn that began before his inauguration, September 11, the stock market tumble, and the corporate governance scandal. Davis's only excuse is that he spent too much as the economy sagged. Small wonder, then, that voters put heavy blame on Davis, but don't do the same with Bush. Fred Barnes is executive editor of The Weekly Standard.