English 版 (精华区)
发信人: Christy (绿叶~~捣鼓六仙捣毁仙), 信区: English
标 题: A Piece everyday
发信站: 哈工大紫丁香 (2002年07月24日19:18:52 星期三), 站内信件
How Bush could lose
Suddenly, corporate fraud and the the stock market collapse have made US Rep
ublicans look vulnerable
Jonathan Freedland
Wednesday July 24, 2002
The Guardian
Like the Prince of Denmark, the president of the United States is haunted by
his father. Nothing disturbs the sleep of George W Bush so much as the expe
rience of George HW Bush - especially now.
Bush the First waged war on an evil Arab bogeyman and garnered through-the-r
oof poll numbers as his reward. He then saw those ratings tumble, as people
forgot about the war and worried about their wallets instead. Along came a D
emocratic challenger who understood: "It's the economy, stupid." The voters
agreed, thought Bush had no answers to the downturn and promptly ejected him
from the White House.
That's the memory that wakes Dubya into a cold sweat. For after nearly a yea
r riding sky-high, the president is suddenly looking vulnerable - vulnerable
enough for opponents to start wondering whether the story of Bush the Fathe
r is about to be revisited on Bush the Son.
Like his dad, he was impregnable during wartime. His battle against Osama bi
n Laden brought him the same plaudits his father gained taking on Saddam Hus
sein (and the same grumbling that their prey had slipped free). Americans al
ways rally around their president during moments of crisis, placing the incu
mbent almost beyond reach. So it was with Bush: no one could touch him.
But now that moment seems to be passing. "The war against terror is no longe
r on people's radar," says one high-ranking Democratic operative. Now the st
ory obsessing the 24-hour news channels is the series of nuclear strikes the
US economy has been launching against itself - typified by this week's bank
ruptcy claim by WorldCom, the largest such collapse in American history.
These hit the White House in a double blow. The first, and most direct, come
s in the accusation that Bush and his confrères are personally implicated i
n the current wave of corporate scandals. In 1990 there was a securities and
exchange commission investigation into how Bush came to sell $848,000 worth
of stock in Harken Energy two months before its value plummeted. Officially
that case is closed, but if the contents of the file were ever to be leaked
it could spell trouble.
In more serious doo-doo is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The oil company
he used to run, Halliburton, is now under investigation by the SEC over its
accountancy practices. Who did the work? Why, it was Arthur Andersen, the fi
rm at the centre of the Enron scandal. They may be discredited now, but they
obviously impressed Cheney: he appeared in a promotional video for them, pr
aising their tendency to give more than just "by the book" advice. A shrink
analysing that phrase might suggest Cheney's guilty conscience was spilling
out the truth about Andersen's rule-bending service. Either way, it will mak
e a choice clip in a Democratic attack ad of the future - especially if that
SEC investigation comes down hard on the vice-president.
For the moment, though, it's not personal scandal that Republicans most fear
. The real threat is that most decisive electoral factor: the economic well-
being of the voters. And it's that which is taking a hammering.
If Americans are asked the old Ronald Reagan question - "Are you better off
now than you were?" - they would answer with a loud "No". Witness the poll w
hich found the number of Americans who believe their economy is in excellent
or good shape has fallen from 69% when Bush took office to 35% now. No wond
er. Americans are watching the stock market take a daily nosedive - 20% has
been wiped off the Dow Jones since January 1 - taking with it their savings,
pensions and hopes for the future. Millions of regular Americans became sto
ckholders in the 1990s the way low- or middle-earning Britons became homeown
ers in the 1980s: they flocked to it, assuming it represented security. Now
they are seeing all they invested evaporate before their eyes, filling them
with cold fury.
And anger matters in American politics. Successive electoral earthquakes hav
e been triggered by new movements of furious voters, whether the Reagan Demo
crats of 1980 or the Angry White Males who swept Newt Gingrich into the Spea
ker's chair in 1994. Now, predicts California Democrat Oliver Phillips, ther
e is a new group ready to spit blood: "the 401(k) decimatees", those whose s
avings funds, known as 401(k)s, have been annihilated in the current meltdow
n.
They form a demographic that would terrify any party. Aged anywhere between
50 and 70, these are people who were getting ready to retire and now find th
ey don't have the money - but they do vote. They, Democrats hope, will turn
out in droves in November's mid-term elections - overturning the Republicans
' wafer-thin majority in the House and extending the Democrats' one-seat hol
d of the Senate.
It's not that voters think the current economic mess is literally the fault
of Bush or the Republicans (though incumbents always get punished for a slum
p). It's that Americans don't have any confidence in them to do anything abo
ut it. Too many believe Bush and his administration are part of the problem,
rather than the solution. As the New York Times puts it: "Bush himself is a
product of the cowboy end of the Sunbelt economy," while most of his team l
ook like 19th-hole buddies of the WorldCom crowd. His army secretary is a fo
rmer Enron executive, while the SEC - the body probing Cheney - is led by th
e one-time lawyer of the accountancy industry.
Bush has only confirmed that impression when he's tried to dispel it. When h
e addressed Wall Street executives this month, he showed none of the outrage
millions of Americans feel. He condemned corporate "fudging of the numbers"
- far too mild a phrase for what most believe is grand larceny on an unprec
edented scale. Not that anyone knows what he should say: all the old Republi
can remedies, especially any move towards deregulation, is only likely to ma
ke matters worse. The result is that the markets are not reassured by the pr
esident's repeated interventions. "Every time Bush opens his mouth on this i
ssue, the stock market finds a new bottom," says Phillips.
And now, at last, it's not just the Dow numbers that are moving. A poll on M
onday found only 47% of Americans believe Bush deserves re-election; 32% thi
nk it's time for someone new. Which leaves Democrats with an opening.
Among party strategists, a gameplan is emerging. First, they will be careful
not to oppose capitalism itself, which Americans still passionately believe
in, but rather the criminals who have abused it. Second, they will take one
step at a time, focusing on November 2002 before 2004. If they win Congress
, they can send popular Democratic measures to the president - safe in the k
nowledge that he will make himself unpopular by vetoing them. Third, they wi
ll hope a vacancy arises on the supreme court: Bush would have to nominate a
n anti-abortion social conservative to please his rightwing, and the ensuing
"culture war" would galvanise the Democratic vote, particularly women, in t
ime for the presidential election in 2004.
Who would be the Democratic beneficiary of all this, ready to challenge the
once-unbeatable-looking president? It's too early to tell, but you know who
it is in Bush's nightmares: yet another little-known governor of a small sou
thern state with an eye for the ladies and a knack for the sax - just like t
he man who beat his daddy.
--
拿块豆腐撞撞死
找根线粉上上吊
※ 来源:·哈工大紫丁香 bbs.hit.edu.cn·[FROM: 211.144.72.5]
Powered by KBS BBS 2.0 (http://dev.kcn.cn)
页面执行时间:3.821毫秒