Robert J. Chassell wrote:
> Clearly, the Bush Administration hopes either that Al Qaeda is
> weak or that it prefer the known Bush Administration. The
> President could well be defeated in his re-election if a
> symbolically powerful attack takes place within the next few
> months.
Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> responded:
That is not so clear at all. Bush's approval ratings were high
after 9/11. Assuming that Americans will react the same as
Spaniards may be a mistake. In fact, I could see Americans being
more likely to vote for Bush if there is a terrorist attack:
....
... I just don't see a terrorist attack hurting Bush, no matter
when it comes. Why would Americans suddenly hold Bush responsible
for incompetence when they have failed to do so many times
already?
As far as I can see, the people who will decide this election are
currently undecided. My sense is that from their point of view, Bush
has been successful, since there have been no further attacks on US
soil since 2001. Doubtless, if there were another symbolically
powerful attack, their first tendency would be to support Bush.
However, after a time, I think they would ask whether the Bush
Administration has done a good job, since it now has had more than 2.5
years to secure the country.
--
Robert J. Chassell Rattlesnake Enterprises
As I slowly update it, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I rewrite a "What's New" segment for http://www.rattlesnake.com
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
