GOP memo predicts drop in Bush poll numbers Missive urges Republicans to maintain perspective By Sean Loughlin CNN Washington Bureau Wednesday, April 23, 2003 Posted: 4:02 PM EDT (2002 GMT) WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A GOP memo being sent to Republicans across the country predicts that President Bush's high approval ratings will soon "drop to more realistic levels" and that some polls may show him behind Democratic rivals, but cautions that such a development should not be cause for alarm. The memo -- an advance copy of which was obtained by CNN -- comes from Matthew Dowd, a senior adviser for the Republican National Committee, who tells fellow Republicans that the expected drop in approval ratings will likely prompt "a chorus of 'the sky is falling.' " But that, Dowd writes, is not the case, and he urges his party colleagues to keep their cool in the weeks and months ahead. "Every incumbent president in the last 25 years has been behind the opposition in the latter part of his first term -- the sky is not falling," Dowd writes. The memo is to be sent out Thursday by former Montana Gov. Marc Racicot, chairman of the RNC, to Republicans throughout the country, party officials said. Dowd has written similar memos in the past, when Bush's approval numbers were high. The memo comes as more media and political attention is shifting away from the war in Iraq to domestic matters within the United States, especially the economy. And the advice to Republicans is being offered amid heightened campaign activity on the part of the nine announced Democratic candidates seeking to win their party's presidential nomination in 2004. The Democratic hopefuls have grown increasingly vocal in their criticism of Bush, especially for his handling of the economy and his proposal for more tax cuts. The memo says the Democratic base can be expected to solidify in the months ahead, and that Bush's approval ratings -- currently in the high 60 percent to low 70 percent range, according to various polls -- are unlikely to stay so high. The memo points to prior campaigns and administrations to make the point that any drop should not be perceived as a sign of trouble for the Bush White House. For example, the memo says President Reagan was behind Democrat Walter Mondale by as many as nine points throughout much of 1983. Reagan won in a landslide in 1984. And Vice President George Bush -- the president's father -- was behind in several polls by as much as 17 points against Democrat Michael Dukakis in 1988. Bush went on to win the White House. "As the inevitable discussion proceed in the months ahead, this memo should provide both perspective and a reality check. President Bush's approval numbers will again fall back to more realistic levels fairly quickly," Dowd writes, predicting that the poll numbers and changes in the upcoming months will be similar to those experienced by Presidents Bush, Clinton and Reagan. "All were quite successful on Election Day." --CNN Senior Political Researcher Robert Yoon contributed to this report. http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/04/23/gop.memo/index.html
in other words, send in those donations since we can't get it from corporations like we used to thanks to McCain-Feingold.
Hey W, It's the Economy, stupid. And while I personally know that the president really has very little to do with the way the economy is performing, talking about giant tax cuts for your baseball team owner buddies is not the right way to go about getting re-elected. Just ask your pops.
actually his pops signed legislation raising taxes....that was his doom, given campaign promises to the contrary
True, I should have been more clear with my point. The fact that Bush Sr. "just didn't get it" when it came to plight of working Americans in a soft economy and incorrectly assumed that the American people realize that the Exceutive branch can do little in regards to the economy was his ultimate downfall. W is now desperately trying to avoid the same mistake. Unfortunately for him, he doesn't quite have that whole "I feel your pain" look down quite like Clinton did. Granted that was bullsh!t, but Clinton did have that golden "I give a crap" look down pat.
no argument here..i voted for clinton. i think the environment is more different now than democrats who like to compare the two periods believe.
Very true, as a student of the game, I can't wait to see if the Dems can pull somebody worthwhile up to the plate. This is off topic a bit, but one thing that absolutely astounds me is the difference between the facade that candidates throw up at election time and their true demeanor. Bob Dole, Al Gore, and John McCain are all great examples of this. I remember watching Bob Dole on Letterman and thinking, "Hell I might have gievn him a second look if he acted like THAT during the campaign." Same for Gore, in a more relaxed atmosphere, or even not so relaxed (Hardball's college tour earlier this year was a good example) Gore came across as not stiff at all. he did throw out a few canned answers on stuff like abortion, but for the most part it was shoot from the hip commentary. The closest I have seen a candidate come to that would 2 people: Bill Bradley and Ross Perot. Now Ross was a megalomaniac weasel with small man's complex. Nuff said. Bradley on the other hand came across as relaxed and he didn't pull punches when it came to Gore. He wasn't mean, he just gave his take on the administration at the time. I HOPE that he considers another run. I would vote for him in a heartbeat.
