It was not so long ago that Republicans were throwing fits: No matter how much sexual dirt they released about Bill Clinton, they couldn't seem to put a meaningful dent in his approval ratings. Lately, Democrats seem baffled that revelations about pre-9/11 bungling aren't causing George W. Bush's numbers to drop. I think the two situations are even more similar than that…
The American people saw the move against Clinton — as they are seeing the criticisms of Bush — for Politics As Usual…or perhaps Politics As Usual, ratcheted up to a bloodthirsty level. Then, as now, there is/was no national doubt that the folks defending or assailing would instantly swap rhetoric if the other party was in the firing line. Moreover, there's this: In politics, you don't get done in by your enemies attacking but by your allies deserting. Nixon did not call it quits because Democrats were assaulting his integrity but because key Republicans were tip-toeing off the reservation. Clinton had a few Democrats lobbing mudballs his way but there was never any real jeopardy that they would vote to remove him from office. If a few had so indicated, it might have started a save-your-ass stampede…but when Senator Robert Byrd introduced his motion to dismiss the impeachment trial, Clinton was home-free.
Byrd was the elder statesman Democrat most likely to break ranks and, since he didn't, no one did. These days, Republicans seem pretty solidly behind Bush, at least in public, at least as long as he has the power that comes with that kind of seeming voter support. A few are asking hard questions — more about the FBI than the White House — but Bush is in the same reflexive, safe position: His poll numbers are high because it's only the opposition party attacking him. And it will only be the opposition party attacking him because his poll numbers are high.
Will this last? I dunno. I think we're going to hear a lot more about Bush not responding to advance warnings, about his Enron connections, about other past business arrangements that paralleled the Enron debacle. I think we're going to hear an awful lot more about Dick Cheney making millions off dealing with nations that now reside on the Axis of Evil. And, of course, we haven't heard the last of Florida. I doubt the president's rep will get too tarnished until we get closer to the moment when some Democrat challenger — or perhaps John McCain as an independent — starts looking like a viable, preferable alternative. That's assuming anyone ever ascends to that position and, yes, I know it may seem pretty unlikely, these days.
But when Democrats are out there bashing Bush, as they have been lately…I don't think that means much. It may make Talk Radio and the cable news channels more interesting…may shake loose some campaign donations to Democrats…may even give some vicarious satisfaction to the 15-20% of Americans who think we have weasels in the White House. But I don't think it means much. The American people never gave much weight to Democratic criticism of Republicans or vice-versa but nowadays, I think it's really meaningless. After the whole Clinton-Lewinsky thing, we now presume that if the guy in office so much as hiccups, the opposition party will be out there screaming it's proof that he's immoral and incompetent. Democrats may be able to hassle Bush, investigate him, embarrass him and stall his agenda…but they cannot bring his poll numbers down. Only Republicans can do that.