FOR THE RECORD

How about the first hundred days? Political analyst Kevin Phillips concludes, on basis of half-dozen polls, that George Bush is doing best on foreign policy: public doesn’t think he is moving too slowly in dealing with Mikhail Gorbachev. But Phillips finds three areas of danger for Bush: 1) the people think he’s off to a slow start; 2) his Administration is perceived as lacking direction; 3) there’s more “image” there—puppies, hunting trips, horseshoes, etc.—than “substance.” . . . Washington Post’s David Broder finds three faults with Bush: his tendency to postpone hard decisions (the budget compromise), his failure to tame Congress (John Tower, the Contra compromise), and his lack of leadership (perhaps he has nothing to say? Broder asks). . . . Most devastating characterization of Bush at One Hundred was George Will’s description: “a pastel President.” . . . Christian Science Monitor’s Godfrey Sperling Jr., who’s seen Presidents come and go, has this to say of Bush’s media critics: “Most of them are people whose candidate lost the last election. So now . . . they fault the winner for not producing the program promised by the loser.” . . . Vice President Quayle ended hundred days Up, according to ABC/ Washington Post poll, which gives him 52 to 30 approval/disapproval rating; Down, according to CBS/ New York Times, which comes up with 22 to 15 disapproval/approval. Comments Democratic political consultant Bob Beckel: It’s difficult for a Vice President to enhance his stature because “nobody thinks about him.”

Serious Democratic pols keep pondering the lesson of Bush’s election. MacNeil/Lehrer Democratic analyst Mark Shields, explaining why Democrats lost in ’72, ’80, ’84, ’88: “[Democrats] have lacked leadership skills. Americans prefer to elect a leader of the nation rather than a head of government. We want a commander-in-chief as well.” . . . Democratic pollster Stanley B. Greenberg, in interview with The Political Report’s Stuart Rothenberg, adds: “Many Democrats have resisted the bare truth of numbers: there is no longer an enduring electoral majority in America centered on a coalition of production workers, low-income families, minority and aging communities.” . . . William Galston, issues director in Walter Mondale’s campaign, recently told Democratic Leadership Council much the same thing: “The gender gap is not the product of a surge of Democratic support among women,” he says, “but rather the erosion of Democratic support among men. . . . The Democratic Party has been losing ground . . . among non-liberals, not liberals, among whites, not minorities, among men, not women.” . . . Former presidential contender Bruce Babbitt says the party must find a new identity. “Invoking the name of John Kennedy won’t do it.”

Featured Tags

How about the first hundred days? Political analyst Kevin Phillips concludes, on basis of half-dozen polls, that George Bush is doing best on foreign policy: public doesn’t think he is moving too slowly in dealing with Mikhail Gorbachev. But Phillips finds three areas of danger for Bush: 1) the people think he’s off to a slow start; 2) his Administration is perceived as lacking direction; 3) there’s more “image” there—puppies, hunting trips, horseshoes, etc.—than “substance.” . . . Washington Post’s David Broder finds three faults with Bush: his tendency to postpone hard decisions (the budget compromise), his failure to tame Congress (John Tower, the Contra compromise), and his lack of leadership (perhaps he has nothing to say? Broder asks). . . . Most devastating characterization of Bush at One Hundred was George Will’s description: “a pastel President.” . . . Christian Science Monitor’s Godfrey Sperling Jr., who’s seen Presidents come and go, has this to say of Bush’s media critics: “Most of them are people whose candidate lost the last election. So now . . . they fault the winner for not producing the program promised by the loser.” . . . Vice President Quayle ended hundred days Up, according to ABC/ Washington Post poll, which gives him 52 to 30 approval/disapproval rating; Down, according to CBS/ New York Times, which comes up with 22 to 15 disapproval/approval. Comments Democratic political consultant Bob Beckel: It’s difficult for a Vice President to enhance his stature because “nobody thinks about him.”

Serious Democratic pols keep pondering the lesson of Bush’s election. MacNeil/Lehrer Democratic analyst Mark Shields, explaining why Democrats lost in ’72, ’80, ’84, ’88: “[Democrats] have lacked leadership skills. Americans prefer to elect a leader of the nation rather than a head of government. We want a commander-in-chief as well.” . . . Democratic pollster Stanley B. Greenberg, in interview with The Political Report’s Stuart Rothenberg, adds: “Many Democrats have resisted the bare truth of numbers: there is no longer an enduring electoral majority in America centered on a coalition of production workers, low-income families, minority and aging communities.” . . . William Galston, issues director in Walter Mondale’s campaign, recently told Democratic Leadership Council much the same thing: “The gender gap is not the product of a surge of Democratic support among women,” he says, “but rather the erosion of Democratic support among men. . . . The Democratic Party has been losing ground . . . among non-liberals, not liberals, among whites, not minorities, among men, not women.” . . . Former presidential contender Bruce Babbitt says the party must find a new identity. “Invoking the name of John Kennedy won’t do it.”