Newsweek: GOP looking like the Dems ("Rebellious and Disorganized")

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

Is Anyone Listening?
For six years, Bush has kept his troops in line. But suddenly, the GOP is looking rebellious, disorganized—in short, a lot like the Democrats.

By Richard Wolffe and Holly Bailey
Newsweek

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11903424/site/newsweek/



March 27, 2006 issue - The banner hanging over President George W. Bush read united to victory. But as Republicans listened to Bush slog through his familiar pep talk at a $2,500-a-head fund-raiser last Thursday night, the party faithful knew they were anything but united. Over the last year, they ejected a majority leader, squabbled over ethics and spending, and openly criticized the president on Iraq, port security and a Supreme Court pick. If the Republican guests were hoping for a spiritual revival, they left disappointed. Bush's speech met with tepid applause, and GOP officials shuffled to the cash bar feeling deflated. "It just wasn't as celebratory as it has been," said one House aide who declined to be named when talking about a private event.

For five years nobody needed to blare the word "united" at Republicans; it was their biggest strength. The president handed his agenda to Congress and the party leaders delivered the votes. They twisted the arms of small-government conservatives to pass education reforms and Medicare drug benefits. They held their ranks together even as the Iraq occupation spiraled downward in 2004. And they picked up seats in two election cycles. But now that strategy has fallen apart. Members of Congress, tired of being taken for granted by an overbearing White House, have lost faith in the president's political touch. Social Security, Katrina, Harriet Miers, ports and, of course, Iraq have destroyed the aura of invincibility that once gave Team Bush its swagger.

The stress is starting to show. Republicans are beginning to look and sound like their own caricature of the Democrats: disorganized, off message and unsure of their identity. Fearful of defeat in November, GOP candidates are uncertain how to pull themselves together in the eight months left before the elections. The toughest question: whether to run, as they have in the past, as W Republicans, or to airbrush the president out of their campaigns. "What I've tried to tell people is that a political tsunami is gathering, and if we don't do something to stop it, we'll be in the minority a year from now," says Rep. Ray LaHood from Illinois. "But some people still don't get it."

The president won't have an easy time persuading wobbly Republicans to stick with him. Bush recorded his lowest approval rating in the NEWSWEEK Poll, with 36 percent; congressional Republicans trailed Democrats by 11 points (39 to 50 percent). Second-term presidents often suffer a six-year slump, losing seats for their party at this point in their tenure. But Reagan, Johnson and Eisenhower—who all watched their parties crater in their sixth year—enjoyed approval ratings in the high 50s or low 60s, according to Gallup. Bush has actually been lucky in one respect. He held his party together longer than most two-term presidents. Johnson kept control for just eight months until he suffered defeat on the parochial issue of home rule for the District of Columbia in 1965, when Democrats took him on—and won. "They saw they could vote against the president and wake up alive the next day," says presidential historian Michael Beschloss.

[regnaD kciN]

1. That's the problem with those Republicans...

They're not only disorganized, they're too angry and devoid of ideas.

:spank:

[ginnyinWI]

2. Hey....

...I resemble that remark! :rofl:

Seriously, it's better than goose-stepping to the tune of the GOP--blech.

[IntravenousDemilo]

3. Oh, you know they really don't have any excuse for their current woes.

After all, they control both houses, the judiciary, and the executive. Everything should be going their way, logically. The only possible explanation for everything going wrong for them all at once like this, is that the neocons have built their house on rotten pilings and rickety timbers, which have been eaten away by public mistrust, and the structure is collapsing under the weight of its general horribleness. Evil's really heavy.

[calimary]

4. "Evil's really heavy" - GOOD! And it's damned well-deserved, too.

It makes me think of the hapless bill frist's comment after he journeyed to the area devastated by the monster tsunami. And what was the eloquent verbiage? "There's no one to blame!" That's what he said. "There's no one to blame!" Like we always have to have somebody to blame, don't we, dr. quackenfrist? This was one thing even a block-headed partisan like him couldn't figure out how to pin on Clinton. And when they find themselves in that position, they're lost. Out of their element, and their comfort zone. Because you ALWAYS have to be able to figure out a way to pin it on Clinton. They can't do that here, either. Poor dears.