Looking at weekend
Newsweek polling data, it seems clear that Americans strongly support efforts in Iraq while thinking that Bush is doing a poor job there. The latter is easy to understand, while the first part of that concept gives many of us pause. How can anyone support being in Iraq?
Ron Brownstein says it's simple:
In almost all polls, at least half of Americans say they still support the initial decision to invade Iraq, despite the failure to find the weapons of mass destruction Bush and his aides cited as the principal justification.
The reason, many opinion analysts agree, is that most Americans think the region, and the United States itself, will be more secure if Iraq becomes stable, pro-Western and democratic.
But as order wavers in Iraq, so does confidence that the mission is meeting those goals. Support for Bush's handling of the war in Iraq has plummeted to less than 45%. Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed in a Gallup Poll last week said things were going badly for the U.S. in Iraq, the most anxiety about the occupation the survey has recorded. Nearly half of Americans say they doubt the U.S. will successfully establish a stable Iraqi government.
And there's no question that, unlike 9/11 where Clinton, Bush, the FBI, the CIA and everyone in government is blamed, the Iraq debacle is entirely the responsibility of George W Bush. In fact, the view of the public re 9/11 is so clear Brownstein further writes that:
That widespread belief has two major implications for the 2004 campaign. First, it means that based on the information available so far, most Americans recoil from efforts to blame Bush for the attacks. One leading Democratic interest group recently asked a focus group in Florida to respond to a potential television ad accusing Bush of negligence in failing to stop the attacks. The result was volcanic -- against the ad.
"They were so angry I thought they were going to turn the tables over," said a Democratic operative who watched the session. "It was a very polarizing ad, and it pushed people who were on the fence decidedly away from us."
Second, the sense that everyone failed before Sept. 11 -- almost by definition -- means most Americans are likely to judge Bush more on his actions since then. That helps explain why even in polls released since Clarke's criticism, most Americans still give Bush positive marks for his handling of terrorism. The judgment is so stable because it is rooted in experience: the absence of another major terrorist incident inside the U.S. since Sept. 11.
Put the two together and you have Newsweek saying:
Bush 42 (45)
Kerry 46 (43)
Nader 4 (5)
Undec. 8 (7)
[editor's note, by DemFromCT] Newsweek states that without Nader, Kerry leads Bush 50 - 43.
along with the Note saying:
But the clear-thinkers among us know that most Americans don't read the Washington Post over the weekend, so the question on all this Iraq/9/11 stuff is, is it filtering out to real Americans in a way that will affect what people think about President Bush and the direction of the nation?
Right now, we have just a few ways to find out -- by looking at polling data or hearing about (mostly) second-hand focus groups.
Which makes the Newsweek numbers at least semi-frightening if you are a Bushie.
They show Kerry leading Bush, 50 percent to 43 percent (that's outside the +/- 3 percent margin of error). Putting Nader into the mix narrows the gap, with Kerry taking 46 percent, Bush taking 42 percent, and Nader garnering 4 percent. Fifty-nine percent of those surveyed said they're dissatisfied with the direction of the country, and Bush's approval rating fell from 52 percent to 48 percent. Kerry's approval rating held steady at 51 percent.
The CW says that Bush is vulnerable on Iraq and is becoming more so every day. Care needs to be taken on how the 9/11 issue is framed. That doesn't mean we should let Bush frame the issue (Ashcroft's hearings will keep Bush's errors of omission in the public eye), but the very fact that Bush is no longer invulnerable on 9/11 is already helping Kerry immensely. And unless the news in Iraq gets better, things for Bush will get worse.
We know it, he knows it, and that's why there's a press conference tomorrow night. And maybe that's why, as Kos points out, Bush has been reverting back to 'cowboy' rhetoric, to the detriment of us all.