While Saturday's capture of Saddam Hussein is a major victory for American forces in Iraq, the success doesn't ensure a win for President George W. Bush in November, Utica-based pollster John Zogby said Sunday.
Zogby, whose polling firm, Zogby International, is closely monitoring public opinion about the war with Iraq and the next presidential election, predicted a sharp rise in Bush's approval ratings in the immediate aftermath of the capture. But he said support for the president likely would return to the 50-50 split that caused chaos in the 2000 election, just as it did in the months following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
Zogby: Well, there's no question in my mind that the president will receive a spike upward in public opinion. I don't think there's a doubt in my mind that this is a significant development and a significant turning point in the war, and it should translate into positive news for the president. The issue will be, however, whether or not the higher numbers that he receives for this capture of Saddam Hussein will last for a while.
So far, what we've seen with this president has been two bell-shaped curves in terms of public opinion, roughly hovering around 50-50 and then spiking upward dramatically immediately after 9/11, back down, and then back up into the mid-70s during the shooting war and the military victory in Iraq, and then back down to 50-50. He will go back up, but will it be sustained? That's the question I have.
But I still think we have a 50-50 country and I still think the president's numbers will probably dissipate, and that no matter who the Democratic nominee is, that person is going to show up with 45 percent of the vote, the closer we get to the election.
It's been hard for me to see a (Sen. Joseph) Lieberman scenario. He's getting some renewed attention because of the Gore diss. In between, I think there's considerable confusion, and to some degree (Wesley) Clark's problem is, "OK just where do you stand?" You can't have it both ways. (John Kerry and Richard Gephardt) voted for the war resolution, but on the other hand you're now saying you're against the way the president is handling the war. Too detailed, too confusing. Kerry, I think, is in real trouble. Gephardt has at least been able to finesse that issue. He voted for the preemption resolution. What Gephardt did and Kerry did not, is Gephardt immediately turned to health care and to trade, and he made those the issues upon which he is running his camp.
O-D: How would a rosy war scenario affect the candidacy of Howard Dean?
Zogby: Dean was in this position before, during the military victory. There was a sense of well, Howard Dean is obsolete, he's irrelevant now. Then things went badly on the ground and I won't say new life was breathed into Dean, but he was vindicated. I won't say new life was breathed into his campaign simply because the dynamics of his campaign have really transcended the war issue. For the angry Democrats, the war is number one on the list, the tax cuts are number two, then the lack of spending on education.
It all depends if Dean is able to finesse the war and tap into the anger the Democrats already feel. I think the war has helped congeal public opinion on the Democratic side. It's renewed that anger. I still think Dean will be able to focus his anger on other issues.
I snipped most of this interview for length, but I decided to keep the most important stuff in this diary considering alot of this stuff is important and has been the center of our debates here. You can read the rest of Zogby's interview here, I highly recommend reading it.
http://www.uticaod.com/archive/2003/12/15/news/22100.html