The Cornerites are taking a whack at Christie Todd Whitman’s assertion that “Bush’s three-percentage-point margin in the popular vote is the lowest of any incumbent president ever to win reelection.” Does this mean much? Well, it’s better than being beaten, as some have remarked. But it is also indicative of the fact that the voters didn’t weigh up the incumbent this time around and come to the conclusion that he fully deserved re-election. Most of the time, that’s what they do with incumbents up for a second term. Remember Eisenhower’s, Nixon’s, Reagan’s and Clinton’s re-election margins? Bush didn’t win a big majority; he remains much less popular than most re-elected presidents; if he’s smart, he’ll understand this. But he is smart and seems intent on a major go-for-broke two year legislative agenda that both assumes the fragile public support he has and utilizes his institutional power in a one-party government. Same as the first term, actually. And since he doesn’t need to get re-elected again, less risky for him. As for the GOP, their interests may not be so well aligned with the president’s. That’s the plot-line for the next two years, I’d say. The high water-mark for unified conservative dominance has already happened.
MURDER IN AMSTERDAM: The New Yorker had the brilliant idea of sending Ian Buruma to investigate the van Gogh murder and its ramifications.
The Dish 