This is wierd, but I think President Bush is making moves that open up opportunity for any Democratic opponent to possibly win. Two months ago, I'd have thought that impossible. Now I am not sure.
1. So far, we have a jobless recovery. This election will be dominated by the jobs problem. And, the jobs aren't coming back.
2. Distancing himself from the Enron prosecutions will be hard. Many lost their jobs and life savings. How can the President distance himself from that business?
3. Exposing that undercover CIA agent just to get revenge on her husband was stupid, and it was humiliating to those who both support the President and want an effective intelligence service.
4. Proposing a manned mission to Mars doesn't sound sane. (Perhaps they plan to make Hillary an astronaut.)
My original comment/question was in jest. Your answer was so profoundly weird, I had to ask what you meant.
With that said and for those who are not negatives logged onto the Internet, here is 5-minutes worth of search results on the matter.
(1) From The Sporting News website, there is no correlation. Big suprise. For the nine Presidential elections starting in 1968, the NFC won 6 titles, the AFC won 3, and the Republicans 6 Presidencies, the Democrats 3. While the numbers are the same, the correlation isn't there, as Republicans won following 4 NFC and 2 AFC victories. Likewise, the Democrats won following 2 NFC and 1 AFC.
(2) For those interested in the Super Bowl and the S&P500, look at Brian Trumbore's article at
Looks like we want the loser of the super bowl to get over 20 points.
Some very good points. Some I agree, some I don't. Still, no one on the Democratic side can win because they come from a party that doesn't even have a platform. They don't realize that much of America sees them as complainers with no vision. Howard Dean was the big man and now look at him. He rants and raves and makes an idiot of himself. Last night Wesley Clark tied himself to Michael Moore, a real nut. They sabotage themselves.
The Red Planet issue bugs me too. Spending more and more is a mistake. He must change that perception or......well, what will happen? I argue no candidate on the Democratic side has the finesse to win in November. Democrats, I urge you to speak up and tell us who can beat Bush and why. The silence is deafening.
and now for some substance for my favorite Dems:
P.S. #1 Disagree. Manufacturing jobs are being lost all over the world due to changing times and other conditions out of our control.
It's called cheap labor and the U.S. workers not keeping their skills up with the rest of the world.
#2 Disagree. Fail to see the proof or how he can be hurt by it. Please clue me in.
#3 Exposing the CIA Agent will be hard to prove so you cannot argue one way or the other on this one.
#4 Who cares about Mars right now? I agree with this one.
How about the things he's done right that will help him win in November?
Thanks for the replies.
On the jobs issue, the President will have to deal with that issue. He's had four years. Like it or not, jobs is an election issue. The recovery numbers "in the news" are a good harbinger, but still way too many people are out of work. State budgets are getting hammered now, and that will put more on the streets. Of course, all of this is not the President's fault, but politically he owns it.
On the Enron scandal, it's guilt by association, and probably nothing more. But, it is what is in the voter's mind that will be important in November. Lay, Skillings, etc. cost people their jobs and savings. There are alot of middle-of-the-roaders who will not take kindly to that.
The CIA outing is producing a special investigator. That kind of process is unstoppable. Carl Rowe should think about taking up fishing to protect the President.
The Mars boon doggle may be the symbol that opponents need to represent the unfortunate debt built up over the past few years. The last three GOP presidents have been in the cockpit when all but $1Trillion of the debt was built up. It's going to be a hard sell to keep the blame on the Liberals.
On the positive side, the Iraq War has burst the bubble of the Middle East crazies. At least that's what I think. This is no prediction of how smooth things will go in the future, but the bubble has been burst. Did you see how quickly Iran pulled in-line on the nuclear inspections. The visions of those bunker-busters going off in Bagdad must have made a lasting impression.
By the way, is there a correlation of the Super Bowl with the election? Anyone know? New England is strong, but they're not playing in the snow. That Carolina defense is going to level the playing field. I'm going with Carolina.
I am pulling for Bush to win in 2004. A democrat this fall would offer just enough reform for the current system to seem flawed but tolerable. Four more years of Bush's profiteering and back scratching should be enough to sicken even a brown nosing toady like you.
A vote for Bush in 2004 is a vote for reform in 2008. It sometimes takes a Hoover, Harding, or Grant to justify a step change in ethics and even a good man like John McCain could not escape the stench that will cover the Republican party.
BTW, did you notice that the chief inspector looking for WMD's quit. He said that he does not believe there have been significant WMDS since the early 90's when the UN inspectors found them and had them destroyed. Bush replaced him with a former UNSCOM guy.
Which Democrat can win? You see, that's the problem. The Dems have losers vying for the ticket. I don't see anyone on this board that appears to be a Democrat that has endorsed any of them. Very telling.
Bring back Al Gore?