VIEWS: 18 PAGES: 17 POSTED ON: 11/24/2011
Wilson 1 Hannah Wilson PSCI 1051 Section 002 Dr. Books 5 April 2009 The Decline of the Republican Party In December of 2005, the Republican and Democratic parties were rated almost equally when Americans surveyed were asked if they viewed the parties in a favorable light. While both were rated positively by about half of those surveyed, shortly thereafter the Republican Party began to show a marked decrease in favorable opinion. Within January of 2006, public opinion of the Republican Party had decreased to a 36% favorability rating, and has since remained mostly beneath the 40% favorability range. On the other hand, as the Republican Party has experienced a decline, the Democratic Party has experienced a meteoric rise. According to a recent Gallup poll, while only 41% of Americans surveyed view the Republican Party in a positive light, 56% have a favorable opinion of the Democratic Party. Even within the party lines there is a vast difference in approval ratings. In another poll, taken shortly after Election Day, only 78% of Republicans rated their party favorably, while 91% of Democrats viewed their own party in a favorable light. Independents too were kinder to Democrats, giving them a 47% approval rating while the Republicans received a rating of only 32%. This occurrence leaves many wonder what has caused such a marked decline in the Republican Party and what do the Democrats have that the Republicans don‟t? The first and most important area to examine for answers is the previous administration of the Republican Party. According to Gallup polls gauging the favorability rating of both Bush and the Republican Party, the public perception of the party and its head have been closely Wilson 2 linked since January 2004. Thus as Bush‟s approval rating showed a steep decline starting in December 2005, so did the party as a whole. His mistakes became the party‟s mistakes. Therefore, in order to discover the reasons for its decline, one has to find the reasons for Bush‟s decline. Bush has been highly criticized on a wide variety of issues. However, the most widely contested decision he made was his decision to enter into war with both Iraq and Afghanistan. In 2001, the United States was the victim of a terrorist attack at the suspected hands of the terrorist network Al-Qaida, led by Osama Bin Laden. This attack caused the death of nearly 3000 Americans. (Hirschkorn) As a result, on September 20, 2001, Bush delivered a speech before Congress announcing the commencement of his “War on Terror.” Within this speech he declared We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation in every region now has a decision to make: Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime (CNN, Transcript of President Bush‟s Address, 2001). Shortly thereafter, on October 7, 2001, the war in Afghanistan began with the first air strikes being aimed at the country. The campaign, labeled Operation Enduring Freedom, was aimed at removing the Taliban from power in Afghanistan, based on the accusation of harboring Al-Qaida fugitives, as well as at capturing Osama Bin Laden (Richmond Times, 2001). On March 20, 2003 the U.S. launched its second stage of the war, by launching missiles at Baghdad, Iraq. The Wilson 3 purpose in this attack was to topple Saddam Hussein from power on suspicion of possessing “weapons of mass destruction.” Bush was criticized greatly for both of these wars on a variety of issues. Many question his motivations for entering Iraq, due to the fact that once Hussein had been removed, it was found that there were in fact no weapons of mass destruction. This led many to believe that the war was one merely of revenge for the attacks of September 11. (Rutland Herald, 2005). Others suspected that it was a move for Iraq‟s natural resources, namely oil. (Balkhi, 2005). Secondarily, Bush was criticized for not having thoroughly planned the attack of Iraq before executing it. According to an article published F.J. Bing West in the Military Review in 2006, one of the gravest missteps of the Iraq war was the failure to properly analyze the culture before entering. According to West, Bush and his administrators assumed that upon the removal of Saddam Hussein the Iraqi middle class would rise up to replace him. However, they did not take into account the fact that after years under rule by a tyrant there would be little leadership to be found. (West, 2006, 3) West also notes that the division of authority of Iraq policies and budget from the security of the country in 2003 caused major organizational problems. Thirdly, the disbanding of the Iraqi army in 2003, rather than cooperation with it, changed the role of American soldiers from that of liberators to those of oppressive occupiers, leading inevitably to more fighting and bloodshed for both Iraqi‟s and Americans. (West, 2006, 4) This lack of planning has caused a delay in withdrawal from the country, which has angered many Americans. In April of 2007, a Gallup poll revealed that 57% of Americans were in favor of setting a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, whether that withdrawal was to happen soon or not (Jones, 2007). Still others have criticized the effect the Iraq war has had upon the war in Afghanistan, a war many view to be more central to the “War on Terror” than the Iraq war. By the end of 2001, the Taliban had been effectively Wilson 4 removed from Afghanistan, although Bin Laden had not yet been found. (The NYTimes, The Remembered War) As the war in Iraq progressed, however, the attention was drawn away from the situation in Afghanistan. Resources that had been designated for the Afghanistan front were funneled into the Iraq war instead, in the form of money, technology, and personnel. Thus the Taliban, which had been seeking refuge in Pakistan, was able to reenter the country and de- stabilize the efforts that had been made there (Rohde & Sanger, 2007). On August 25, 2005, Hurricane Katrina struck the southern coast of the United States, causing the loss of more than 1,800 lives and more than $81 billion in damages (U.S. Dept. of H.H.S). Aid to survivors was slow in coming, and Bush was blamed for much of this. Television broadcasts showed thousands of people trying to survive on the streets without food, water, or medical attention. (Alpert, 2009) Meanwhile, Bush, instead of visiting the disaster area in person, was filmed flying above the wreckage to survey the damage on the way to his ranch in Texas. During the midst of the disaster Bush also infamously commended FEMA director Michael Brown, saying "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job." Brown later resigned from his position and received the blame for the majority of the disaster‟s mistakes. Thus, these two instances combined had a disastrous effect on Bush‟s image. Bush was now seen to be out of touch with the events occurring and with the American people. Weeks after the devastation of Katrina, Bush‟s approval ratings dropped 44% to 40% while disapproval rose to 52%. In addition, by mid-September the proportion of Americans who viewed Bush as a strong and decisive leader had plummeted from 62% to 49% (Abramowitz & Weisman, 2006). Though the effect of Hurricane Katrina on Bush‟s overall job rating is hard to decipher, it is clear that it did make a contribution to the deteriorating image of Bush‟s ability to capably lead the country. (Newport, Little Impact, 2006). Frank Luntz, a GOP pollster, claimed that for a national political shift to Wilson 5 take place there are four necessary ingredients. Three of these necessities-economic anxiety, pessimism about the future, and frustration with leaders-already existed. Luntz cites Katrina as providing anger, the fourth component needed to propel voters to push for a change in the Republican majority running Congress at the time. (Lawrence, 2005) However, President Bush was not entirely responsible for the decline of the Republican Party. In 2005 the GOP received another hit on its image, this time in the form of the house majority leader Tom Delay. In September of that year Delay was indicted on charges of money laundering and redistricting congressional seats in Texas. Delay established a group called Texans for a Republican Majority who redrew congressional seats in order to gain 5 more seats for Republicans in the 2004 election. Two others were indicted in the case, accused of routing $190,000 in corporate donations to Texas legislative candidates, attempting to evade a state law prohibiting such an action. Delay had also been reprimanded three times by the House ethics committee in 2004 for using the Federal Aviation Committee for political purposes, attempting to bribe a colleague into supporting pieces of legislation, and for taking advantage of certain energy firms with legislation at stake by attempting to receive their involvement in a fundraiser (Talev, 2005). Delay was forced to step down from his position as a result of the indictments, yet he continued to maintain a position of leadership within the party. He maintained his previous office, continued to reside over certain committee chairmen meetings and continued to lobby house members for floor votes. He even participated in meetings concerning budget cuts for the following year. This refusal to completely step down was detrimental on both sides of the fence. Delay‟s image of corruption poisoned the image of the Republican Party in the eyes of the Democrats and the general American public, and served to confuse the chain of command and destabilize the unity of the Republican Party. (Weisman, 2005) Wilson 6 Similarly in October of 2005, Dick Cheney‟s chief of staff, Lewis Libby was indicted. Libbey, who was an important administrator in the Iraq war, was indicted on perjury, making false statements to the FBI, and obstructing justice. All three counts revolved around the case surrounding the 2003 leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity. Directly after Plame‟s husband, Joseph Wilson published an editorial piece in the New York Times criticizing the Bush administration for intentionally misleading the American Public with regard to the Iraq War, Libby began to inform others of Plame‟s career. Libby later told FBI agents that his information had come from Tim Russet, a claim that was later proven to be false. Compounded with the fact that Cheney had read the article shortly before the leak and written notes in the margins questioning whether Wilson had been sent there by his wife, the impression made was that Libby‟s motivations were not a benign slip of the tongue, but rather a malicious attack of revenge upon Wilson. Additionally, Bush‟s claims that to his knowledge no one in his administration had provided the leak made him appear either as a liar or as unknowledgeable about the actions of his own administration. (Sandalow, 2007) Taken together, the indictments of Libby and Delay cast the image of the Republican Party under an ethically questionable cloud in entering the 2006 congressional elections. Coupled with the ever falling reputation of Bush and the Republican Party, the GOP did not fare well. Within the Senate Republicans lost 6 seats to the Democrats, giving the Democrats a majority with 51 seats. The Party fared no better within the House elections, losing 30 seats. Combined with the one seat Democrats gained from a previous Independent sitter, the Democratic Party held a clear majority with 233 seats in the House (CNN, America Votes 2006, 2006). Wilson 7 In the 2008 election Republicans had a chance to redefine their party‟s image through their candidate for the presidency. Their choice, John McCain lost to the Democratic Party‟s candidate, President Barack Obama. A Gallup poll taken days after the election showed the favorability rating of the Republican party as a whole had dropped from 40% to 34%, a drop no longer corresponding to Bush‟s own approval rating. Thus, the blame can most probably be laid on the Republican‟s poor showing in the election, McCain‟s role in particular. (Saad, GOP Takes Another Image Hit Post-Election, 2008) A closer inspection of election exit polls shows that Obama beat McCain in nearly all categories surveyed. McCain held the majority within his own party, within the category of conservative ideology and within the category of race he managed to maintain a slight majority, as well as within a few income levels. . However, Obama pulled the majority vote in every level of education surveyed, nearly all income levels, and every age level under 65. Obama also won the majority vote in all races surveyed, excepting whites. In fact, he managed to win 95% of the black vote which constituted a record breaking majority. (CNN, Election Center 2008). Thus, McCain‟s inability to appeal to a variety of demographics was detrimental to his campaign. Interestingly, Obama won a large majority of the Hispanic vote (62%), a demographic that usually goes to the GOP. This is particularly interesting because of McCain‟s stance on immigration. In 2000, he endorsed a bill, along with Senator Edward Kennedy, to set up a system of guest-worker-visas for Hispanics and to allow undocumented and illegal immigrants a “pathway to citizenship.” However, according to Tiffany Gabbay of CNS News, he was harmed by the immigration stances of others on his tickets, candidates with much harsher views. (Gabbey, 2008). Raul Reyes of USA Today, on the other hand places the blame more heavily on McCain‟s reluctance to support a swift end to the Iraq War or for the creation of Wilson 8 universal health care coverage, both of which were important Hispanic voters, as well as the vote of the American public as a whole (Reyes, 2008). Obama also managed to win the majority of votes in the area of religion, with the exception of Protestants. However, McCain only managed to pull in 54% of this vote, compared to Obama‟s 45%, a difference that is relatively low especially when considering past elections (CNN, Election Center 2008, 2008). In the 2004 Presidential election, Bush pulled 59% percent of the Protestant vote compared to John Kerry‟s 40%. The previous year, although receiving a lower percentage of the vote, at 56% Bush still managed to beat McCain‟s percentage (Election Results, 2004). In fact, in 2004, 40% of Bush‟s votes came from White Evangelicals. Christian Evangelicals expressed concern early on in the 2008 election that candidates were not emphasizing their stances on abortion, gay marriage, and government sanctioned school prayer enough. In 2006 this group‟s frustration with scandal caused many to simply not vote and was partially responsible for the loss of seats in the House and Senate. (Slater, 2007) Also affecting the Conservative Christian opinion in 2006 was their indignation at the fact that Republican policy makers had placed proposed Social Security and tax changes before the issues of abortion and gay marriage. (Kirkpatrick, 2006) Their rise in disapproval of Bush was also clear in a Gallup poll taken between 2004 and 2007, although apparently for reasons affecting the rest of the country as well. While in 2004 68% of Americans who attended church weekly approved of Bush, by 2007 that number had fallen to 50% by 2007, following the same arc as irregular or non church attending groups. (Newport, Religious Whites Still Tilt, 2007) Thus though McCain did earn the approval of the Conservative Christian majority, partially because of his own lack of emphasizing the social issues that concerned them most and Bush‟s failure to maintain their level Wilson 9 approval throughout his second term, the majority was not large enough to give him the boost he so desperately needed. The situation in Iraq was originally the most central issue of the 2008 Presidential Election. McCain, though supportive of withdrawing troops from Iraq, did not support the notion of setting a timetable to do so, saying “„Our goal is an Iraq that no longer needs American troops…to promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility.” It is a failure of leadership‟" (Newport, Exploring the Iraq Timetable, 2008, ¶ 5). Obama on the other hand supported both the withdrawal of troops and a timetable to do so. A statement on his official website read: Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of one to two brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months (Newport, Exploring the Iraq Timetable, 2008, ¶ 4). When CNN asked Americans the question “„which comes closer to your view about U.S. troops in Iraq? The U.S. should set a timetable for withdrawal by announcing that it will withdraw all of its troops from Iraq by a certain date. The U.S. should keep troops in Iraq as long as necessary without setting any timetable for withdrawal.‟” 62% of those surveyed voted to set a timetable, while 37% voted against it. However, when the question was asked in a way that emphasized the fact that both sides were focused on eventually withdrawing troops, the votes split almost evenly Wilson 10 along the party lines. Republicans preferred a withdrawal without a timetable, while Democrats preferred a timetable to be created. (Newport, Exploring the Iraq Timetable, 2008). Thus while early reports may have predicted that McCain‟s stance in Iraq would have harmed his campaign, initially it was one of his strengths, particularly after a troop increase in Iraq brought success (Cain & Schnur, 2008). By the time Election Day arrived, however, the economy was the most important issue in nearly everyone‟s mind. Years of deregulation and a bursting housing bubble after years of low interest rates caused Wall Street to experience the largest crisis since the Great Depression. The defaulting of homeowners on loans began to rise in 2006, while the actual lending never slowed. Thus in June of 2007 two hedge funds owned by Bear Stearns, which were heavily invested within this subprime market failed. As the year progressed, more and more banks found that they were suffering from mortgages that had defaulted. Foreclosures increased, causing housing prices to fall and defaulted mortgages continued to increase. The Federal Reserve took steps to bolster Wall Street; however its measures could not stave off the upcoming crisis. In September of 2008 the government took over the government-sponsored entities of the housing market, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. As the month progressed government officials met to discuss the prevention of the bankruptcy of the global financial services firm, Lehman Brothers. Unfortunately, though, talks broke down and the government‟s refusal to salvage the company resulted in its eventual collapse, which negatively affected the worldwide economy. As bailouts began to be necessary for large companies and the stock market continued to flail, the federal government met to devise a bailout plan to stop the crisis in its tracks. A $700 billion proposal was made, which was then amended by congress to provide structures for oversight, limits on executive pay and the option for government involvement. However, though Bush lobbied Wilson 11 congress to pass the bailout, it was rejected in the House, 228 to 205, with the Republicans leading the charge for its defeat. (The New York Times, Credit Crisis). It is within this financial turmoil that McCain lost any edge he had maintained over Obama. From June throughout August Obama and McCain had run a close campaign according to Gallup polls taken at the time. Toward the end of August Obama had led over McCain, but at the beginning of September, following his appointment of Governor Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential running mate, McCain began to pull ahead in the polls, surpassing Obama in a 10 day lead. This lead however was abruptly halted by the onset of the financial crisis. (Jones & Newport & Saad, 2008) Obama effectively turned the market crisis into an advantage for himself, pinning the blame for its crash on the economic policies of the previous administration, and tying these policies to McCain, saying that his presidency would only offer more of the same (The New York Times, Credit Crisis). McCain, on the other hand, claimed that the fundamentals of the economy were still strong, instead laying the blame for the failing economy on governmental corruption. Most disastrously, he suspended his campaign in the end of September in order to attend White House meetings attempting to form legislative plans to repair the economy (Cain & Schnur, 2008). However, he returned to his campaign before the legislation was actually created. Unfortunately for the Republican Party he never regained his previous lead, and thus lost the election to Obama (Jones & Newport & Saad, 2008). The aftermath of the 2008 election revealed more than ever how truly lacking in direction and purpose the GOP is. The party has splintered into dozens of smaller coalitions, causing disagreements on which policies and ideologies they should choose, and which leaders they should look to for leadership. According to New York Times columnist David Brooks, rapid reform has been pushed for in the Middle East for years, yet those conservatives who subscribe Wilson 12 to the ideas of Edmund Burke distrust such reform. Brooks, who pinpoints Burke as the origin of modern conservatism, asserts that “what Burke articulated was not an ideology or a creed, but a disposition, a reverence for tradition, a suspicion of radical change.” (Brooks, 2007, ¶ 1). Religious conservatives push for policy to be based on eternal truths, citing policies on abortion, gay marriage, and stem cell research. However, Burkean Republicans do not necessarily believe that policy should be formed from an abstract truth, but must instead come from constitutionalism. (Brooks, 2007). Republicans who push for the defense of the country in areas such as Iraq and Afghanistan clash with those who subscribe to the idea of isolationism. The choice for a leader has also been complicated by clashing viewpoints. Some considered Governor Sarah Palin to be an excellent choice for a leader, representing a “fresh-faced future”. However, still others strongly contested this opinion, among them Colin Powell and Kenneth M. Duberstein, both of which were so dismayed at the choice that they dropped the Republican ticket and declared their choice of candidate as Obama shortly before Election Day. (Tamenhaus, 2008) African American Michael Steele was officially appointed the head of the Republican National Committee in January of this year, presumably at least partially in an attempt to give the Republican Party a new face, one different from an old white male (Nagourney, Michael Steele, 2009). However, the good that has been done through this is being counteracted by other self-appointed leaders of the Republican Party, namely Rush Limbaugh. The Democratic Party has striven to paint Limbaugh as the leader of the GOP, the White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel even going so far as to call Limbaugh the “voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party” (Stein, 2009). Limbaugh has even blasted RNC chair Michael Steele on the air of his radio show. Limbaugh says of Steele: Wilson 13 It‟s time, Mr. Steele, for you to go behind the scenes and start doing the work that you were elected to do instead of trying to be some talking head media star, which you‟re having a tough time pulling off…Mr. Steele: You are head of the R.N.C. You are not head of the Republican Party. Tens of millions of conservatives and Republicans have nothing to do with the R.N.C. and right now they want nothing to do with it (Nagourney, R.N.C. Chairman Apologizes, 2009, ¶ 3). In response, Steele later spoke of Limbaugh, saying “„Rush Limbaugh, the whole thing is entertainment. Yes, it‟s incendiary, yes, it‟s ugly.‟”(Nagourney, R.N.C. Chairman Apologizes, 2009, ¶ 7). However, Steele later called to apologize to Limbaugh effectively renouncing his own leadership in deferring to Limbaugh‟s. The Republican reputation is also suffering post election due to a refusal to participate in Obama‟s attempted bipartisan attempts to heal the economy. Proposals made by Democrats have all been rejected by Republicans, while their proposal is to initiate a federal spending freeze, a tactic which is completely inappropriate for dealing with the crisis at hand. Thus the decline of the Republican Party has been a culmination of a failed presidential administration, ongoing, unwanted and ill-planned wars, and a failing economy. The Party has lost its support from nearly every American demographic, including race, gender, age, education, and income. Even the party‟s stronghold, the Conservative Christian sector, was pushed away by corruption within the party‟s leadership, and failed to show their support in the 2006 and 2008 elections. The Republican constituency feels that its leadership is out of touch with what the everyday people want and need in their lives, and thus are unable to effectively govern them. Therefore in the 2006 and 2008 elections the people put their foot down, sending the Party a Wilson 14 message loud and clear: either adapt to the current times and make some changes or find yourself obsolete and out of power. Wilson 15 Works Cited Abramowitz, Michael & Weisman, Jonathon. (2006, August 26). Katrina's Damage Lingers For Bush. The Washington Post. Retrieved http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2006/08/25/AR2006082501481.html Alpert, Bruce. (2009, 12 January) President Bush concedes mistakes during Katrina, but says fed action not slow. The Times-Picayune. Retrieved http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/01/bush_concedes_mistakes_during.html Balkhi, Khadija. (2005, February 25). Iraq war 'undertaken on false assumptions'. Business Recorder. BBC. 2001: US launches air strikes against Taleban. Retrieved March 14, 2009, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/7/newsid_2519000/2519353.stm Brooks, David. (2007, November 5). The Republican Collapse. The New York Times. Retrieved http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/opinion/05brooks.html?_r=2&emc=eta1 Brooks, David. (2009, March 9). Taking A Depression Seriously. The New York Times. Retrieved http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/10/opinion/10brooks.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 Cain, Bruce E. & Schnur, Dan. (2008, November 3). What caused McCain's poll numbers to fall? Los Angeles Times. Retrieved http://www.latimes.com/business/investing/la-oew- schnur-cain3-2008nov03,0,6970010.story Carroll, Joseph. (May 2, 2007). All Major Groups Agree Iraq Should Be Government’s Top Focus .Retrieved on March 14, 2009 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/27433/All-Major- Groups-Agree-Iraq-Should-Governments-Top-Focus.aspx CNN. America Votes 2006. Retrieved on March 8, 2009 from http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006 CNN. Election 2004. Retrieved on March 7, 2009 from http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html CNN. Election Center 2008. Retrieved on March 7, 2009 from http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=USP00p2 CNN. (September 21, 2001). Transcript of President Bush’s Address. Retrieved March 15, 2009, from http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/20/gen.bush.transcript/ Gabbay, Tiffany. (November 6, 2008) McCain Lost Ground With Hispanics, Despite Immigration Stance. Retrieved March 8, 2009 from http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/article.aspx?RsrcID=38890 Gallup. Iraq. Retrieved March 14, 2009 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/1633/Iraq.aspx Wilson 16 Hirschkorn, Phil. (October 29, 2003). New York reduces 9/11 death toll by 40. Retrieved March 14, 2009, from http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/10/29/wtc.deaths Jones, Jeffrey M. (May 1, 2007). Americans Favor Iraq Timetable, but Not Necessarily a Speedy Withdrawal. Retrieved March 14, 2009 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/27418/Americans-Favor-Iraq-Timetable-Necessarily- Speedy-Withdrawal.aspx The New York Times. Credit Crisis-The Essentials. The New York Times. Retrieved http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/credit_crisis/ Jones, Jeffrey M. & Newport, Frank & Saad, Lydia. (November 5, 2008). Obama’s Road to the White House: A Gallup Review. Retrieved on March 7, 2009 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/111742/Obamas-Road-White-House-Gallup-Review.aspx Kirkpatrick, David D. (2006, October 20) Republican Woes Lead to Feuding by Conservatives. The New York Times, pp. A19 Lawrence, Jill. (2005, November 3). Democrats target scandal-weakened DeLay - Indictment gives challenger shot at his seat and party hopes of regaining House, Senate. USA Today, pp. 8A Nagourney, Adam. (2009, March 2). R.N.C. Chairman Apologizes to Limbaugh in Flap Over His Role. Message posted on http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/02/rnc- chairman-apologizes-to-limbaugh-in-flap-over-his- role/?scp=4&sq=rush%20limbaugh&st=cse Nagourney, Adam. (2009, January 30). Steele Elected G.O.P. Chairman. Message posted to http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/gop-balloting-begins- inconclusively/?scp=2&sq=michael%20steele&st=Search Newport, Frank. (August 29, 2006). Little Impact of Katrina on Bush’s Overall Job Ratings. Retrieved on March 21, 2009 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/24283/Little-Impact- Katrina-Bushs-Overall-Job-Ratings.aspx Newport, Frank. (November 5, 2007). Religious Whites Still Tilt Towards GOP, Bush. Retrieved on March 8, 2009 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/102538/Religious-Whites-Still-Tilt- Toward-GOP-Bush.aspx Newport Frank. (August 5, 2008). Exploring the Iraq Timetable issue. Retrieved on March 15, 2009 from http://www.gallup.com/poll/109294/Exploring-Iraq-Timetable-Issue.aspx Reyes, Raul. (2008, March 8). McCain Has Opening With Hispanics. USA Today. Retrieved http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/03/mccain-has-open.html Richmond Times. (2001, October 31). U.S. Bombards Taliban-Coordination With Opposition is Increasing. Richmond Times, pp. A-10 Wilson 17 Rutland Herald. (2005, May 7). Thirst for Revenge. Rutland Herald. Saad, Lydia. (May 11, 2006). Democrats' Image Surpasses GOP in Recent Poll. Retrieved March 2, 2009, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/22768/Democrats-Image-Surpasses- GOP-Recent-Poll.aspx Saad, Lydia. (November 20, 2008). GOP Takes Another Image Hit Post-Election. Retrieved March 2, 2009, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/112015/GOP-Takes-Another-Image- Hit-PostElection.aspx Sandalow, Marc. (2007, March 7). In public's mind, White House is guilty-Its campaign to discredit its detractors will be remembered after Libby is forgotten. San Francisco Chronicle, pp. A1 Slater, Wayne. (2007, July 14). To some evangelical Christians, GOP not preaching to the choir- Movement divided over presidential hopefuls, future of moral agenda. Dallas Morning News, pp. 1A Stein, Sam. (2009, March 1) Rahm On Rush: He's The Voice, Energy And Intellect Of The GOP. The Huffington Post. Retrieved http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/01/rahm-on- rush-hes-the-voic_n_170854.html Talev, Margaret. (2005, September 29). Tom Delay Indicted. The Sacramento Bee, pp. A1 Tanenhaus, Sam. (2008, November 5). A Once-United GOP Emerges, in Identity Crisis. The New York Times. Retrieved http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/us/politics/06repubs.html?_r=1&emc=eta1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Hurricane Katrina. Retrieved March 21, 2009 from http://www.hhs.gov/disasters/emergency/naturaldisasters/hurricanes/katrina/index.html Weisman, Jonathon. (2005, November 2). DeLay still acting as if he's House majority leader. The Washington Post. pp. A11 West, B.J. Bing. (September-October, 2006). American Military Performance in Iraq. Military Review 2006, 5(86), 2-7.
Pages to are hidden for
"wilson"Please download to view full document