Centrist columnist John Avlon (who wrote the classic book on centrism The Independent Nation) looks at President George Bush’s growing credibility gap in terms of historic and current roots in his latest New York Sun column.
And it shows there may be no quick “out” for Bush, if you factor in his political style and personality. Here are some excerpts:
Despite his campaign in 2000 as a “uniter, not a divider,” President Bush has been a polarizing figure since reaching the White House. What is different in his difficult second term is that criticism of the president no longer breaks neatly down along partisan lines.
Indeed, you can almost see what the history books are going to do when it comes to George Bush. That “uniter, not a divider” line will be repeatedly cited. Why? Because Bush has proven to be one of the most polarizing political figures in modern presidential history.
Avalon then cites polls showing how today Bush has limited overall electoral appeal. Then he notes that “President Bush’s picture does not improve compared to Gallup Polls for other presidents in the spring of their second year of their second terms.” He goes through the other presidents then adds:
The President who most resembles President Bush at this point in his term is Harry Truman, who in March of 1950 scored an identical 37% support on the Gallup Poll, the month after Senator Joe McCarthy announced the infiltration of the State Department by communists, in the aftermath of the fall of China and on the eve of the outbreak of the Korean War. Truman soldiered through the travails of his second term, and while suffering low poll numbers, is today regarded as among America’s greatest and most beloved presidents. His combination of folksiness and geopolitical steadfastness in a time of dramatic change may give Bush advisers reason for optimism as they look toward history’s vindication.
And then there’s the “nut graph” of his analysis:
The problem of perceptions of the president would then appear to be different than the broader issues of war and peace and prosperity. Instead, the problem stems from a widening political credibility gap that can be seen in the growing chorus of criticism of President Bush from unlikely quarters. The Gallup poll has shown that the steepest loss in support for the president since his reelection has come from independents and moderate Republicans.
Indeed independents and moderates – who initially supported the president after his election at levels consistently around 55%, and near 90% in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks – now show something between disregard and active dislike for President Bush, with his support plummeting to 27% for independents and 31% among moderates.
The president’s anemic support among these bellwether groups is evidence of his failure to solidify broad popularity beyond his base. Now influential members of the Republican base are expressing displeasure with the president’s policies as well.
If you read this site repeatedly, you’ll note that his point is one of our continuing themes: the steady erosion of Bush’s suppport as he has repeatedly “titled” towards social conservatives at pivotal moments, casting his lot with a kind of politics that eschews coalition building and compromise in favor of raw-power politics. More often than not, the concerns of many independent and moderate voters fall by the wayside.
We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again: unless he shifts political gears, George W. Bush may go down in history as a President who ran an administration of the base, by the base and for the base.
Avalon then gives examples of Republicans who are breaking with Bush over policies (a trend that is likely to continue if his poll numbers continue to fall). And then he writes this:
President Bush often speaks of his desire to find “bipartisan solutions” and “put aside partisan politics,” as he did most recently calling for entitlement reform in his State of the Union address. And while we must assume that the president’s statements are made in good faith, many of his political allies have pursued a more hardball partisan agenda with Mr. Bush’s apparent approval, leading to the credibility gap evident in his shrinking base of political support.
With the nation engaged in a war against terror with no end in sight, we could use more of the “Uniter, Not a Divider” President Bush promised to be when he first applied for the job. That might prove to be his best chance at improving his short-term poll numbers – and his long-term legacy – during his last one thousand days in office.
It sounds as if GWB is trying to cast himself in that role in the now-bursting-forth debate over immigration reform and tougher border controls. The problem is: Bush now has a credibility problem. When he makes assertions, there is a huge chunk of people now who think he’s doing it for political gain, and that it doesn’t come from any core principles.
The problem for George Bush is: those folks are now found not just among Democrats, independents and moderates, but among some members of his own party as well.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.