The Washington Post will have two page one items tomorrow that are interesting. First, gloom among the Republicans:
A number of GOP operatives said privately Thursday that they now see minimum losses of perhaps 18 seats (in the House), with 25 to 30 a more likely outcome. Democrats need 15 to take control of the House.
And a rumor of peace?
The growing doubts among GOP lawmakers about the administration's Iraq strategy, coupled with the prospect of Democratic wins in next month's midterm elections, will soon force the Bush administration to abandon its open-ended commitment to the war, according to lawmakers in both parties, foreign policy experts and others involved in policymaking.
Can you say: CUT AND RUN?
More from WaPo (not online yet):
Senior figures in both parties are coming to the conclusion that the Bush administration will be unable to achieve its goal of a stable, democratic Iraq within a politically feasible time frame. Agitation is growing in Congress for alternatives to the administration's strategy of keeping Iraq in one piece and getting its security forces up and running while 140,000 U.S. troops try to keep a lid on rapidly spreading sectarian violence.
On the campaign trail, Democratic candidates are hammering Republican candidates for backing a failed Iraq policy, and GOP defense of the war is growing muted. A new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll released this week showed that voters are more confident in Democrats' ability to handle the Iraq war than the Republicans'--a sea change from the last election.
snip ...
One point on which adherents of these sharply different approaches appear to agree is that ``staying the course'' is fast becoming a dead letter. ``I don't believe that we can continue based on an open-ended, unconditional presence,'' said Sen. Olympia Snowe, a centrist Maine Republican. ``I don't think there's any question about that, that there will be a change'' in the U.S. strategy in Iraq after next month's election.