Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.news From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: Bush's staff blamed Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:01:12 EST Message-ID: \SE A;NATION;ELECTIONS '92 \HD Bush's staff blamed \SH Offensive team waited too long \BY Paul Bedard \CR THE WASHINGTON TIMES Monday morning quarterbacking began in earnest yesterday in Republican circles, and, not surprisingly, the White House offensive team bore the brunt of the criticism. Facing the first Republican presidential defeat since 1976, White House and Bush-Quayle '92 campaign officials laid the blame for Tuesday's landslide Electoral College defeat on President Bush's lackluster re-election effort, his fumbling campaign and the recession. "The two words that cost the Republicans the election: the economy and the campaign," Vice President Dan Quayle told an interviewer. "Bill Clinton ran a much better campaign and the economy wasn't good." "We didn't have as good a message on the economy as the fears that Bill Clinton raised about the economy," Republican Party Chairman Rich Bond said. "I think, when you really boil it all down, without having had a chance to really reflect on all the data yet, is they had a better message on the economy than we did. People had more confidence in Bill Clinton to handle the economy than George Bush," said Mr. Bond, who plans to step down soon. While many Bush aides blamed the administration's lack of ideological direction and Mr. Bush's violation of his 1988 "no new taxes" pledge, most agreed that the inability to focus the campaign and provide voters a reason to choose Mr. Bush was the key to failure. "We never ever had a plan that would work. It was haphazard and day-to-day," said a senior administration official. "And it didn't work." Even the heralded return of Secretary of State James A. Baker III to the White House did little to turn the tide other than bring discipline to the campaign operation, according to administration sources. Sam Skinner, ousted to make room for Mr. Baker, noted shortly after the Republican convention that "now the election is his [Mr. Baker's] to lose." Administration officials said Mr. Baker underestimated the ire of conservatives, the middle class and conservative Democrats at Mr. Bush and thought he would be able to turn the situation around by the end of September. But by the time he entered the picture, Mr. Bush was quickly sinking in the polls and had given Mr. Clinton a massive edge the president would never be able to recover from. Campaign and White House officials yesterday couldn't cite one event or a special period in which the president began losing the election, but instead said it was a combination of missed opportunities, missteps and the tug of war between senior campaign officials who sought an aggressive campaign and White House officials who wanted Mr. Bush to remain "presidential" for as long as possible. The pitfalls: * Mr. Bush failed to take advantage of his huge popularity after the Gulf war to launch a "domestic storm," aides said. Instead of using the popular mandate to push his demand for a line-item veto, a balanced-budget amendment or a cut in the capital gains tax, he sat in the White House and managed his government. "Time after time he failed us," said a senior administration official. * The spirited challenge by conservative columnist Pat Buchanan sapped conservative support away from Mr. Bush, who did little to win it back. Instead, Mr. Bush and his aides, notably former Chief of Staff Skinner, simply warned conservatives that they had no other choice than Mr. Bush. * Once he conceded that a recession was gripping the nation, Mr. Bush waited before coming up with a fix-it plan. And when he presented his six-point plan in the spring, it was ridiculed as being unimaginative. In addition, Mr. Bush appeared to do little to push it through Congress. "You cannot just propose an idea and then not follow it up," said a Bush aide. * The president waited too long to get into the campaign. "For a long time I decided I wouldn't get in the arena. . . . Some thought it was a little late. I've had some criticism of that from my own party," he said last week on CNN's "Larry King Live." Mr. Bush said he wanted to remain presidential for as long as possible and probably waited too long. * The formation of Bush-Quayle '92 was delayed until late last year, long after Mr. Bush has sunk in the polls and become the butt of Democratic jokes. * The recruitment of Mr. Baker didn't revitalize the campaign as expected. Instead, the campaign looked like a repeat of the negative attack on Michael Dukakis in 1988. * Neither the campaign nor the White House produced any imaginative ideas to lure new voters to the Republican ticket. This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM