It’s backlash time. Christopher Dodd’s blast at the President after his El Salvador speech, says Democratic Majority Leader Jim Wright (Tex.), was “hyperbolic,” “florid rhetoric,” and dangerous. “It is a dangerous exercise for people to club the President in a delicate matter of foreign policy.” . . . Democratic analyst Ben Wattenberg agrees. The Democrats might lose the 1984 election if they make it possible for Ronald Reagan to “charge all across the nation denouncing them as spineless.” . . . Kevin Phillips found Reagan’s April 27 speech a winner because the Democrats “seem likely to box themselves in on this one.” Phillips, incidentally, finds that Reagan has now reinforced his El Salvador position “with an increasing effort in the global peacekeeping/arms control dimension.” . . . Newsweek poll finds the President’s approval rating went up 11 points (from 33 to 44) on El Salvador after the talk; and ABC-TV, which requested listener response, got over a quarter of a million calls approving Reagan stand, and only 78,000 against.
Right now Alan Cranston is looking good among Democratic contenders. Los Angeles Times, which to be sure operates in his own backyard, finds him number two to Walter Mondale, and Boston Globe believes Cranston may do better than Gary Hart in New Hampshire, where Cranston’s “organization is widely considered better across the state.” . . . Guess who’s also been testing the waters in New Hampshire: Jesse Jackson. Jackson, who kicked off a campaign to register an additional two million blacks in the South between now and Nov. 1984, was heartened by Garth/Penn-Schoen survey showing he would get 9 per cent of the vote if he runs for President….The most titillating item of the week, presidentabile-wise, is rumor floated in New York Daily News that big-money liberals may be looking at New York Gov. Mario Cuomo as possible less-lackluster candidate. What makes the item so fascinating is that the News says Richard Nixon thinks Cuomo would be the hardest man for Reagan to face….George Will gave it to Mondale but good in recent column in which he cites 19 anti-defense-spending votes by Mondale since 1971 (all of which Mondale lost) and comments: “If there is a President Mondale responsible for U.S. security in the 1980s, he will be glad Senator Mondale failed so frequently in the 1970s.”




Comments