Presidential politics 2004
The fall of the Spanish government following the bombing in Madrid on March 11, 2004, brings renewed interest in the proposition I put forth last November that another major terrorist attack in America in 2004 could have a huge impact on the Presidential election. (See my earlier remarks of January 22 and 23, 2004, in the Archives on the left). In brief: in the event of a major terrorist attack, if the administration is perceived as "sleeping on the job" it will be bad for President Bush. There is no indication that the Spanish government was "sleeping" but voters who did not support the war in Iraq came out in large numbers and voted for change. American morale and support for the Bush administration will be tested over the next few months as never before. We have lost as many servicemen and women in Iraq to random acts of terrorism since the end of the shooting war as we did in the war. Supportive nations are going (to use Mrs. Thatcher's terminology) "wobbly in the knees," (e.g. Poland's president says he now doubts Saddam ever had WMD; the Spainards are going to withdraw their 1,300 peace keeping troops from Iraq). If this sentiment spreads, it is unlikely the United Nations will give the administration some cover (and the American people a breather) and agree to take over - from the United States - the major role of peace keeping in Iraq, after June 30, when we turn the country over to Iraqiis. If the drumbeat of bad news out of Iraq continues, a major terrorist incident in the United States could be the "huge impact" straw.
#161 (04-10)
E-mail your comments
Check archives on left for earlier postings.