The Sydney Morning Herald has figured out why Dubya is competitive (registration required) in the 2004 Presidential Election. It has nothing to do with his policies because everyone knows that Kerry should be winning:

On the face of it, it seems ridiculous that George Bush should have any chance of re-election next week. He is the first president to oversee a net loss of jobs in the US economy since the Great Depression. He has led his country into the most controversial war since Vietnam.

If only we had a paper like this in the United States to help us know the truth about our country. (Oh wait, I almost forgot the New York Times!) Then justice could be done, Kerry could be President and the economy could be good again. (Funny that they failed to mention the unemployment rate.)

Despite the opening tone, they do get some credit for properly discerning the true reason why the U.S. President is a viable candidate in this election:

The dominant theme of this presidential election, the first since September 11, 2001, is national security. The No. 1 issue of importance to voters is the Iraq war, according to Gallup, and the No. 2 issue is the threat of terrorism. So the two top issues in the minds of the American voter are both national security matters, and here we begin to unravel the mystery of Bush's political resilience.

They even include this sensible Walter Russell Mead quote:

Nobody asked Abraham Lincoln what the unemployment rate was in 1864, as the Union forces marched to victory in the Civil War.

The article then identifies the group that has been swayed by the terrorism issue: the Scots-Irish. Not familiar with them? Perhaps you would recognize them by their nicknames: Rednecks. Trailer-park trash. Racists. Cannon fodder. Thus the title of the article: Trailer trash: fightin' mad, want Dubya.

I believe this article is another attempt to damn Bush, although I find that it makes Kerry look like the flaky one:

Jacksonians voted Democrat until Nixon, then moved to become solidly Republican. This is the group that is keeping Bush competitive in the election, despite the 1100 American war dead in Iraq and the $US150 billion in costs. This is the group that Kerry courts when, despite a lifetime as an advocate of gun control, he goes shooting for the cameras during the election campaign. And this is the group that Kerry tries to appease when he tries to out-macho Bush with his tough talk about killing terrorists and waging war.

Actually, the article is not a total loss. Granted, its assessment of the U.S. Economy and the situation in Iraq appear as if they are taken directly from John Kerry's website. But aside from the headline and disdain that they would vote for Dubya, it is actually very fair and informative regarding the Scots-Irish Americans.

I was delighted to learn that the heavily Scots-Irish people of West Virginia make up only 0.6 per cent of the national population yet ranked first, second or third in military casualty rates in every US war of the 20th century. As far a labels go, Patriot sounds more accurate than Redneck. It also directed my attention toward this book by James Webb: Born Fighting: How the Scots-Irish Shaped America, which is now on my must read list (and my Amazon wishlist).

I suppose what interested me most about this topic is the fact that the heritage they are highlighting is my own. My Grandfather immigrated from Scotland shortly after WW2. Although perhaps I am making their point for them. After all, I am voting for Bush - or rather did vote for him last Friday.

I suppose that one man's castle is another man's trailer.