PICK ONE
Reading various commentaries on President Bush, there seem to be two mutually exclusive opinions floating around:
Which is it? It can’t be both, can it?
FILED UNDER: 2004 Election
Reading various commentaries on President Bush, there seem to be two mutually exclusive opinions floating around:
Which is it? It can’t be both, can it?
Or, it’s (a) for domestic policy and (b) for foreign policy. Of course, nothing drives away moderates and energizes opposition like the appear of failure and/or actual failure.
He’s in danger of losing his base because he does not fight hard enough for conservative principles and is willing to compromise on damned near anything.
He’s energizing his opponents and driving away moderates in droves because he is a right wing ideologue who refuses to make even the slightest concession to achieve consensus.
It’s certainly possible that he could end up with the worst of both worlds, seen by his base as overly compromising but at the same time seen by moderates and opponents as too inflexible. Perception is everything, and it’s plausible that the same actions would be seen in an entirely different way by these factions. For a simple example, look at the situation the Palestinian P.M. finds himself in, where he’s unable to satisfy either the hardliners on his own side or the Israelis.
Welcome to the squeeze.
does the name jimmy carter ring a bell when it comes to this conundrum?