CAN PRESIDENT BUSH help Republicans retain control of Congress? He thinks so. And so do more Republican candidates than you might guess, given Bush’s improved but still relatively low popularity. In fact, he’ll appear in many states not ordinarily viewed as Bush country: Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, California, Ohio, just to name five. “I think I can help,” Bush said at an Oval Office session last week with seven journalists. “And if I can’t, Laura can.” First Lady Laura Bush, who years ago told Bush she’d marry him so long as she’d never have to give a speech, has become a frequent campaigner for Republican candidates.
Bush has no illusions about his ability to persuade Democrats to vote for Republicans. But he thinks he can influence independents and drive up Republican turnout on November 7. “There are a lot of people out there that hopefully I’ll be able to inspire to turn out,” the president said. “There’s a lot of people out there from the ’04 campaign that are motivated by this administration.” He didn’t mention the problem he may have in persuading alienated conservatives to vote.
He cited his history, as president, of overcoming early expectations of defeat. “They said that there’s no way this president,” who won a close election in 2000, “can do anything in 2002.” But he barnstormed for Republicans, who wound up winning two seats in the Senate and six in the House. In early 2004, when he was running for reelection, Bush said, the conventional wisdom was that “he’s done, he’s gone.” Yet he won and Republicans picked up four Senate seats and three in the House. “Now, for most of this year, people have said there’s no way [Republicans] are going” to win. Bush insisted Republicans would keep majorities in the Senate and House.
Is Bush kidding himself? Is his optimism about the midterm election merely the happy talk required of a party leader? My guess is he really believes it and doesn’t take the case for a Democratic sweep seriously. Still, the consensus view of his aides is that, as things now stand, Republicans will hold the Senate and House by very narrow margins, perhaps by only two or three seats in each body. This means that, even by the calculations of his advisers, an eruption of bad news could tilt the election to Democrats.
We know the case for a Democratic resurgence: Iraq, Katrina, and puny wage gains that trail the growth in the economy and productivity. On top of those, the president’s approval rating, at roughly 42 percent, is below where he stood in 2002 (low 60s) and 2004 (low 50s) and correlates with a decisive defeat for Republicans.
But Bush is correct that he can still have a large and even decisive role as an active player in the campaign. If Bush “has the ability to dominate the dialogue, he can push this election toward the Republicans even as he remains unpopular with the voters,” pollster Bill McInturff told the Wall Street Journal last week. For one thing, because he has the biggest megaphone, he can affect what Republican chairman Ken Mehlman calls the “national conversation” that already accompanies the campaign.
The president characterized his role this way: “I can help by setting the stage, setting the agenda, reminding people of the stakes of the war we’re in.” Actually, he’s already done so by elevating the war against Islamist terrorists as an overriding national concern and as a campaign issue. And Bush intends to devote a portion of his standard stump speech this fall to the war on terror.
His five speeches on terror in recent weeks, plus rapidly falling gasoline prices, have given Bush a boost in public opinion polls. In a private Republican survey, he jumped nine percentage points in approval of his handling of the economy, eight in his dealing with Iraq, and eight in his trustworthiness and honesty.
There’s an inverse relationship between gas prices and presidential approval: When prices rise, approval falls, and vice versa. Bush complained at the meeting with journalists that the press has a double standard when covering gas prices. “Used to be on the front of the news,” he said, when prices were soaring. One newspaper ran an arrow each day to indicate the direction of prices. “When the price was going straight up, you could see it,” he said. “I knew things were getting pretty good because you can’t find” the arrow anymore.
“I believe that these elections will come down to two things–one, firm belief that in order to win the war on terror, there must be a comprehensive strategy that recognizes this war is being fought on more than one front, and, two, the economy,” Bush said. “The economy is in pretty good shape.” His advice on how voters will judge the economy: “Watch that price of gasoline.”
The president’s second term slump, from which he’s only now recovering, triggered the notion that Republican candidates were massively spurning Bush. It was never true. “There are many more [House] members who want the president to come in than he could ever satisfy,” says House Republican whip Roy Blunt.
David McSweeney is the Republican House challenger with the best chance of ousting a Democratic incumbent. He’s running against one-term Democrat Melissa Bean in a suburban Chicago district. On October 12, Bush will appear in Chicago at a recently scheduled fundraiser for McSweeney and Peter Roskam, who’s running to hold the open seat in an adjoining district for Republicans.
“I support the president,” says McSweeney. “When he gets out [of Washington] and speaks, good things happen.” His opponent has invited former President Bill Clinton to appear in her behalf. “In my district, I’m honored to have President Bush come in,” says McSweeney. “I’ll take him over Bill Clinton any day.”
Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD and author of Rebel-in-Chief (Crown Forum), which will be published in paperback this fall.
