In the old days — that is, before the 2004 election — polls were used to predict how elections would turn out. Now, at least for the Democrats, it appears that elections are to be judged by their effect on the polls.
A front page article in this morning’s Washington Post about the Democrats intention to block and obstruct President Bush’s initiatives points out that one of the main things that “has emboldened Democrats to resist” are
polls showing that Bush gained little ground in public opinion with his victory. “What’s been clear and somewhat surprising in the weeks after the election is that Bush got virtually no bounce and no honeymoon from his victory,” said Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin. “What seems pretty clear is that there was nothing particularly healing about Bush’s victory.”
You know that you’re living in a time of the permanent campaign when a presidential election is evaluated on the basis of its effect on the post-election polls.
Maybe people were bouncing their CCs higher because the holidays were coming?
They still don’t get it.
“What seems pretty clear is that there was nothing particularly healing about Bush’s victory.”
What an asinine statement. We Bush supporters didn’t need healing. If the Democrats choose to be torn up about the election, that’s their business. I don’t know what Republicans are supposed to do about it.
These people, including the ones who tried to stop the certification of the Electoral College decision, need to think for a minute. It’s quite likely that a Democrat will win the Presidency some time in the near future. Chuck Schumer gets it.