Dubya's Risky Political Gamble on Iraq

[Nicholas_J]

By BONNIE ERBE
Apr 20, 2004, 07:53
e


The hot topic among most political pollsters is whether the American public's new focus overseas will ultimately be good or bad for President Bush's reelection prospects in November.

Some are betting on bad, as in this April 14 dispatch from BusinessWeek online that lead with the splasher, "Suddenly, Iraq is overshadowing all else. That's bad news for the president, even though John Kerry isn't making big gains. For the first time since the quagmire of Vietnam and the humiliating Iranian hostage crisis, it looks like international events rather than economic issues could shape an American presidential campaign."

Well, OK, except for one factor: the president's poll numbers seem to have gone nowhere but up since his mid-week news conference defending his handling of 9/11 and his decision to invade Iraq. Those numbers rose despite mounting evidence the president could have done more to prevent the 9/11 attacks. And they rose despite an ascending death toll in Iraq among U.S. soldiers, coupled with an explosion of seemingly unremitting violence.

My take is we are a country so deeply divided politically and yet so passionately dismissive of our right to vote (in the 2000 elections, 51 percent of eligible voters turned out; by comparison in Israel, nationwide elections usually prompt 90 percent turnout rates) that polls taken much more than a month from the election tell little about how the contest will ultimately play out.



http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_4419.shtml

[damnraddem]

1. And polls taken nationally do not tell how the election will play out ...

in terms of electoral votes.

[Nicholas_J]

2. Right now

The electoral vote divide is almost even with Kerry having 178 and Bush 180, and this has fluctuated back and forth with Kerry being a ferw ahead adn then Bush being a few ahead at exactly the same times that the polls have fluctuated with either candidate up or down.