an enviable balance of political capital and a strong mandate. would you make that claim today? do you still have that? i would say i m spending that capital on the war. not only did plummeting support for the iraq war erode bush s ability to drive his second term agenda, but he aels overreached with the social security privatization push. his efforts on immigration reform then collapsed under the weight of the other issues. the administration bungled the response for hurricane katrina and relations with congress soured to the point that when bush nominated harriet myers to the supreme court, republicans didn t even fall in line. many conservatives privately and publicly called her unqualified. after three weeks bush was forced to withdraw her nomination. in december of 2008 shortly before he left office bush s job approval rating had suj to a miserable 27%. congress had often been a thorn in the side of second term presidents. it s a real question whether president obama will be a
i hate to play my media bias card, but if he were a republican he would be characterured more than he is you cannot borrow or be an heir to somebody else s organization. bush temporarily had it in 88. nowadays you have to build, manage and own your own organization. i don t see the passing of the torches. i agree. there is no heir. but i think joe biden is formidable. he was our secret weapon out there in ohio, wisconsin if she doesn t run, i m not betting on andy cuomo over joe biden as vice president. i would. i would definitely it s the same argument for hillary clinton. she will have the money, she hat establishment and all good people around him.
supposedly flawed candidate will win this race. since 1976, the party that wins the presidency loses the state s gubernatorial election next year. it s never wavered. 2001 after president bush was elected, mark warner defeated mark earley. in 2005 after bush s re-election, tim cain beat jerry kilgore by six points. and then last year, mb donal beat deeds. moving on to new jersey, speaking of the terry mcauliffe campai campaign, if you re thinking of working on hillary clinton s campaign, you re supposed to send your resume to mcauliffe.
his party and staying even in the senate. president bush got hammered. republicans lost 30 seats in the house, six in the senate and control of both houses were gone from the republicans. the 1998 election was the only time a two-term president saw gains. in addition two-term presidents typically have one really bad midterm and one not so bad. truman was much worse in 46 than in 50. reagan, split decision after losing big in the house and gaining a senate seat in 1982, republicans lost seven seats in 86 and control, but did better in the house. so, let s take a look at our next one. the two most recent examples of midterms, bill clinton s democrats lost 54 house senates and 8 senate seats in 94 before turning the tables in 98.
the party said the 98 result was due in part, maybe in whole, due to the public backlash against republicans who seemed too focused on the lewinsky scandal rather than governing. president bush saw the opposite a great midterm, not so great second one. republicans grained ground under push in 2002. before losing big in 2006. what s behind the truth of this theory of the six-year itch? it seems logical that the pendulum would swing from one party to the other over the course of six years, but there are extenuating circumstances. by the time his second midterm rolled around, harry truman was four months into u.s. intervention in korea. an effort that republicans used against his party. eisenhower was struggling with the economy.