Stuart Benjamin at Volokh writes:
This strikes me as more significant than most endorsements, both because they endorsed Bush in 2000 (and endorsed Dole in 1996) and because they are very smart small-government types. And it is particularly striking because they supported the decision to invade Iraq.
I've stated before on this blog and in private conversations that Bush is a big government President. He isn't spending money wisely and is going to cause a major blowup if he continues for four more years.
As stated in the New Yorker's endorsement of Kerry:
just after Bush’s inauguration, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office published its budget outlook for the coming decade. It showed a cumulative surplus of more than five trillion dollars. At the time, there was a lot of talk about what to do with the anticipated bounty, a discussion that now seems antique. Last year’s federal deficit was three hundred and seventy-five billion dollars; this year’s will top four hundred billion. According to the C.B.O., which came out with its latest projection in September, the period from 2005 to 2014 will see a cumulative shortfall of $2.3 trillion.
The New Yorker shows enough evidence that Bush and his group are incompetent, and The Economist definately agrees.
Bill Emmott, the editor of The Economist says that Bush is "incompetent". And continues the criticism by saying that one of the biggest problems is that Bush's administration refuse to admit, and subsequently learn from, their mistakes.
