Doubts about Mandate for Bush, GOP

[Jon8503]

By John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei - The Washington Post
Monday 02 May 2005

The day after he won a second term in November, President Bush offered his view of the new political landscape.

"When you win there is a feeling that the people have spoken and embraced your point of view," he said, "and that's what I intend to tell the Congress, that I made it clear what I intend to do as president . . . and the people made it clear what they wanted, now let's work together."

Six months ago, this comment was widely viewed as more than just a postgame boast. Among campaign strategists and academics, there was ample speculation that Bush's victory, combined with incremental gains in the Republican congressional majority, signaled something fundamental: a partisan and ideological "realignment" that would reshape politics over the long haul.

As the president passed the 100-day mark of his second term over the weekend, the main question facing Bush and his party is whether they misread the November elections. With the president's poll numbers down, and the Republican majority ensnared in ethical controversy, things look much less like a once-a-generation realignment.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/050205F.shtml

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. Mandate? How about a trial, followed by Nuremberg style justice?

That the only "realignment" that is called for in this case.

[Atman]

2. There might have been a "realignement"...if they had actually WON

What the hell were they expecting when they stole the election? That people would just fall into line? Sheesh...these guys really are dumber than I imagined!