ASSOCIATED PRESS FIRES DOUBLE-BARRELED BLAST AT BUSH --

[rodeodance]

http://www.prospect.org/horsesmouth/

September 01, 2006

ASSOCIATED PRESS FIRES DOUBLE-BARRELED BLAST AT BUSH -- IS CONVENTIONAL POLITICAL WISDOM SHIFTING?

I was all set to do a cranky post about how the Associated Press ignores poll numbers when two very tough AP stories came along. The stories both deal a heavy blow to the idea that President Bush retains any sort of meaningful political advantage on the "war on terror," and they're both worth a read.

From the first story:

Analysis: Bush Struggles to Deliver

As the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks nears, President Bush is finding it increasingly hard to make good on foreign-policy promises or threats...

Fully one-third of Americans think the terrorists may be winning the war, an AP-Ipsos poll suggested this week. It showed that Iraq worries have spilled over into the broader campaign against terrorists who directly target the United States. Half in the poll questioned whether the costs of the anti-terror campaign are too great, and even more admit that thought has crossed their mind.

The second one is pretty rough, too:
Doubts cloud war on terror, poll finds

Doubts about the war on terrorism are growing. Most people worry that the cost in blood and money may be too high, and they don't think al-Qaida kingpin Osama bin Laden will ever be caught, an AP-Ipsos poll found........

[shain from kane]

1. Let's have a negative trifecta. n/t

[AX10]

2. Five years later, a trifecta could come to destroy Bush and the GOP.

[rodeodance]

3. WSJ--- GOP Advantage On Security Evaporating

.......Relatedly, today's Wall Street Journal has a long front page piece which is by far the most ambitious piece I've seen exploring the massive erosion in the GOP's advantage on national security. It's behind a sub wall, but here are some extended excerpts from the article. It's really a must read.

--Greg Sargent

UPDATE: Post edited a bit from original.

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/sep/01/gop_advantage_on_security_evaporating


GOP Advantage On Security Evaporating

By Greg Sargent

Today's Wall Street Journal has a long front page article which is easily the most comprehensive and in-depth look I've seen at the erosion of the GOP's traditional advantage on national security. From the piece: "A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll in June, buttressed by other polls since, suggested Democrats have gained significant ground. It gave them a three-point advantage on the question of which party can best deal with Iraq, erasing Republicans' 30-point edge of October 2002. Democrats had a nine-point edge on handling foreign policy, a swing from Republicans' 18-point advantage in June 2002." Much more good stuff after the jump.

From the Journal:

In the 2002 midterm congressional campaigns, after Sept. 11 and before the Iraq invasion, Mr. Bush used Senate Democrats' opposition to legislation creating the Homeland Security Department to question his foes' credentials on national security...Republicans defied the traditional pattern of midterm losses for the president's party, restoring their Senate majority to an enlarged 55-45 margin.

This year looks to be different. Recent polls and maneuverings in close congressional contests suggest some reasons the security issue may not help Republicans as much this year.

Most simply put, time has worn the public's patience on Iraq -- and with it the Republicans' edge on security issues. With Democrats noting that the war soon will exceed the length of U.S. involvement in World War II, and with Iraq on the verge of sectarian civil war, the unpopularity of the war has become the year's central issue. Not since March 2004 has a Journal/NBC poll shown that a majority believed the Iraq invasion was worth the cost and casualties. Now polls consistently show a majority thinking the war was a mistake. Majorities favor troop reductions, though not immediate withdrawal. Two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Mr. Bush's handling of foreign policy, and of Iraq specifically...

Linkage has political benefits for the president. Polls show Americans still rate his handling of the broader war on terror higher than his handling of anything else -- Iraq, the economy, foreign policy and his job in general. Even so, Republicans' edge on the question of dealing with terrorism has been slipping for four years, according to Journal/NBC polls -- from a 36-point advantage over Democrats in October 2002, to 18 points in December 2004, to six points in June...

[rodeodance]

5. 'time has worn the public's patience on Iraq -'---BINGO

[young_at_heart]

10. After the Joe Wilson peice, I find it hard to look at the Post

Their credibility is wavering!

[thepurpose]

4. What is all this question shit. The media can't figure out from the polls

they are looking at the opinion is shifting? There is no fucking question its shifting.

[oblivious]

6. They made him. They can break him.

[starroute]

7. I see a potential advantage in this sentence

"Fully one-third of Americans think the terrorists may be winning the war, an AP-Ipsos poll suggested this week."

Bush has been pushing hard on the idea that he's kept America safe from terrorism because there haven't been any further attacks on US soil.

We need to substitute the idea that the real war was never meant by the terrorists to be fought on US soil, and that if the terrorists are winning in the world at large the fact that Americans are safe for the moment is little consolation.

The bottom line is that Bush has taken his eye off the ball and let the terrorists gain immeasurably in power and reputation over the last five years, and that as a result none of us will be safe in the long run.

(And, no, I personally don't believe in "the terrorists" in that sense -- but you have to address the ongoing national dialogue where you find it.)

[Miss Chybil]

8. You must take into account the inverse of that sentence.

Two thirds of people still think everything is going "swimmingly." That the AP wrote the sentence the way they did is a good sign, but we can't throw a blind eye to the two thirds and still be realistic with ourselves.

[sundancekid]

9. INDEED - so much blood & treasure ventured, so NOTHING accomplished

Even if not EVERY Joe sixpack gets it,
seems like the 12-packers have joined
the back packers in a chorus of:

BOGUS POTUS is a FART-FACE HOKUS POKUS