The American people seem a bit ambivalent right now. I've highlighted some of the interesting notes: http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/11/09/newsweek.poll/index.html <I> NEW YORK (CNN) -- Most Americans think more will get done in Washington now that Republicans will control the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress -- but they are wary of some conservative items potentially on the GOP agenda, a new Newsweek poll shows. And while President Bush and his popularity are being hailed for Tuesday's election victories by Republicans, <B>poll respondents were closely split on the question of whether they would like to see him re-elected, with 48 percent saying "yes" and 42 percent saying "no." </B> However, when matched against three possible 2004 Democratic rivals -- <B>Al Gore, Hillary Clinton and Dick Gephardt -- Bush would beat each by a wide margin</B>, the poll found. The poll of 1,000 adults, interviewed after the election on Thursday and Friday, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Asked if they thought a lot more would get done in Washington when the GOP is fully in control, 51 percent said "yes" and 40 percent said "no." <B>Thirty percent said GOP control was a good thing, 34 percent thought it was bad</B> and 29 percent said it would make no difference. However, <B>52 percent said they were either very or somewhat concerned that Republicans would move the country in too conservative of a direction, while 46 percent were not too, or not at all, concerned. </B> And <B>63 percent said they were either very or somewhat concerned that Republicans will push through tax cuts and military spending</B> that will increase the federal deficit. Asked whether the economy or the war on terrorism should be the bigger priority over the next two years, 41 percent said the economy, while 23 percent said terrorism and 35 percent said both should be an equal priority. <B>More than 70 percent of those polled think a lot, or some, progress will be made on strengthening the economy and reducing the terrorist threat</B> in the next two years. But while 80 percent said helping senior citizens pay for prescription drugs should be a top priority and <B>65 percent wanted to see reform of the federal income tax system, there was much less support for new restrictions on abortion, allowing younger workers to invest Social Security proceeds in the stock market, confirming Bush's conservative judicial nominees and opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. </B> Only 24 percent of those polled by Newsweek though new laws to restrict abortion should be a top priority, compared to 29 percent who thought that should be a low priority and 43 percent who don't want to see any changes. While 30 percent said approving Bush's conservative court nominees should be a top priority, 38 percent said it should be a low priority and 22 percent said they should not be confirmed. <B>Only 24 percent thought that partial privatization of Social Security, as proposed by Bush, should be a top priority, compared to 42 percent who were outright opposed</B> and 31 percent who thought it should be a low priority. And nearly four out of 10 Americans polled opposed ANWR oil exploration, as opposed to just 26 percent who thought it should be a top priority and 30 percent who thought it should be a low priority. Bush's approval rating stood at 60 percent in the poll. In hypothetical 2004 matchups, he would defeat his 2000 opponent, former Vice President Al Gore, 54 percent - 39 percent; Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-New York, 55 percent - 40 percent; and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, 56 percent - 37, percent. </I>
Couple of points I take from this: 1) it shows there is room for a competitive White House race if the Democrats can find an even mildly inspiring centrist candidiate. 2) it will be interesting to see if Bush & Co can artfully pick the issues from the right wing that are public winners (Homeland security, prescription drugs, tax simplification with perhaps modest rate reductions most targeting the middle and lower class, and short term in duration) and give limp service to the losers (Artic drilling, privatization of social security, massive permanent tax cuts across the board and the elimination of estate taxes in all circumstances). We will see a lot about Bush's political skill and judegment the next 2 years. I think the moderate Republican NE senators (who view things like Southern and midwestern Democrats for the most part) are going to make or break a lot of what happens--they are the gatekeepers IMO.
Another great argument for proportional representation. Also highlights the pathetic state of the Democratic leadership.
DAMN straight. New blood is needed...badly. Not only will the 2004 Dem Prez nominee have to be a centrist, he or she will have to be someone that isn't from the old guard.