If terrorists strike in this country before the election...

[LZ1234]

do you think it would help Bush in his election or hurt him?

[BattyDem]

1. Neither

I think he'll use it as an excuse to cancel the election :scared:

[PaDUer]

6. Exactly...n/t

[whistle]

9. If terrorists strike again....

...it will just prove that BushCo has been wasting valuable time and resources for the past 33 months. The Bush administration has been so focused and obsessed with Iraq and controlling the Middle East oil that terrorism for them is something they react to rather than be proactive toward. We are not safer against terrorism than we were prior to 9-11 regardless of what the administration has tried to tell the American public. We need regime change right here in America and that's what is going to happen this November. :kick:

[NMDemDist2]

2. geez i dont know -- i have been debating that one

if they give us a "red alert" it may help them. i dunno

[skooooo]

3. probably would depend..

..on the nature of the attack, if it was successful, if it was thwarted, if people were hurt or killed.. I've been wondering about the same thing though. Good question.

[kalian]

4. Martial law...and no elections....

any questions?

[leftistagitator]

5. Help him

They've been laying the groundworks for this since Spain. After the attack, voting for Kerry will be equivilant to supporting terrorism. They will trumpet that message across the land, and a few million of the dumber voters, (read swing voter), will vote for * to stand against OBL. I think al Queda knows this, and will definitely try to attack. The last thing they want is Kerry to win, * is a gold mine for them. They need * if they are to have any chance of defeating America.

[BillZBubb]

11. Correct!

After an attack all we will hear from the media whores is that "if Kerry wins, the terrorists have got what they wanted! Don't let the terrorists win like those weak kneed Spaniards did!"

This will be total media spin from the attack until the election. A lot of people will be influenced by the shock and propaganda. Result: Bush* wins in a landslide.

[sandnsea]

7. Probably help him

Same reason he's being helped by all the bad news now. The tendency for Americans, or any people I guess, to cling together like monkeys in a tree when they're threatened.

[IdaReggaeMon]

8. Hurt

At this point, I can't imagine it would do anything but hurt him. He has beat the drums of the war on terror while being criticized for ignoring security at home in favor of waging war on a country unconnected with 9/11. Another attack here would cause these issues to once again come before the public eye, this time under a much more focused lens.

[jackstraw45]

10. DEFINITELY help

Need evidence?

Look at ALL the information that has come out about the COMPLETE lack of interest in protecting the US pre-9/11.

And the Chimp STILL is seen as a strong leader and strong on defense.

Therefore, his approval will bump up to 60% and he will steal another election.

[Egalitarian]

12. Probably help(nt)

[TheFarseer]

13. i think it would really help him

he's the guy that can't get through a sentence without using the word terror. They ought to stage a terrorist attack and stop it at the last second to win for sure.

[Beam Me Up]

14. Bigger than Bush

I posted this in another thread earlier today:

This is what I've come to believe.
Prior to 9/11 the media led us to believe that a major terrorist attack would likely occur in the United States. Then, on 9/11, when the events unfolded, it was natural for us to assume that, indeed, America was under attack.

What is truly weird here is that no CONCRETE EVIDENCE has been made public which proves a) that the events of 9/11 were a "terrorist" attack and b) that the perpetrators of this attack were OBL and al Quida. YET, we have been told this over and over and over by people in government using the media to broadcast this point of view. Most people even here at DU reading this paragraph will think I'm nuts because they "saw" what happened and have been "told" how to interpret what they saw, and "believe" that what they've been told is the truth. "What other explanation could there be?"

Yet, if one digs into the matter even a little bit, what one finds is layer upon layer of "strangeness."

See this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1440000&mesg_id=1440000

Yes, there were some mostly Saudi men with peculiar backgrounds at least appearing to learn to fly. The FBI, CIA and the administration say they had no idea they were going to do this, and yet within 72 hours of the events, we had names and pictures to show the public that "these were the perps." Yes, the FBI says they hijacked the planes and used them as bombs and yet, strangely, they have offered almost NO EVIDENCE to support that contention. In fact, although the media mostly let it pass, the director of the FBI has himself publicly stated, "In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper—either here in the United States or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere—that mentioned any aspect of the Sept. 11 plot."

THE POINT I'M GETTING AT IS THIS: We, the people of the United States, do not actually know WHAT happened on 9/11, much less WHO perpetrated it. And yet, 9/11 has been used TWICE to launch aggressive military attacks against other nations.

Now imagine that "someone" wants an all out war in the middle east--wants to "permanantly rearange the political map" so to speak. Now, along with this, imagine that a 'small nuclear devise' is detonated in the down town area of any major city in the United States. What are we going to be told happened? What are we all going to believe happened? With possibly a half million dead and twice that many injured and property losses in the hundreds of billions--with 24/7 coverage of the horror for days on end--do you really believe there will not be an "outcry" for RETALIATION on a scale greater than this event? And what president, Bush, Kerry, Gore--I don't care WHO it is--would be able to reign in such an outcry IF WE BELIEVED THAT IT WAS A "TERROIST" ATTACK (and not an accident or a covert operation or whatever else it could be).

Now we have our National Security Advisor telling Face the Nation that another "terrorist attack" could occur between now and the election. And we have General Tommy Franks telling us that a significant attack on America could result in martial law. I say "hurt Bush" or "help Bush" IS IRRELEVANT. What we're dealing with is MUCH BIGGER THAN BUSH. 

Edit: tread/thread typo

[LZ1234]

17. I don't know what to say. I read your thread and am at a loss for words.

I hadn't realized there were so many discrepancies on information I thought were basic facts. Thanks for the link. In fact I printed them so I can look at each item carefully and discuss them. Can you please tell me where you got some of the information from?

[Beam Me Up]

18. Some links for you. . .you'll never be lost for words again.

Thank you for your response.

There are many good sites and once you begin digging, it goes on for days and days worth of reading. Don't believe everything you read, either. Some of it may be disinformation meant to obscure the truth even further. There are some very "wild" theories out there. Keep in mind that too much speculation isn't necessary. We must first come to grips with the fact that we do not now know the truth. We won't ever know what actually happened unless there is a thorough and transparent investigation (something we've not had). Nevertheless, there are sufficient "peculiarities" backed up by facts to throw the accepted story into serious question. The best sites offer links to sources.

One I particularly admire is:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/

Specifically:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html

and

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

Investigations of the physical evidence can be found here:

http://911research.wtc7.net/

Specifically:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/explosions.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/dust.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/steel.html

Also:

http://physics911.org/net/index.php

"There's no substitute for reading the evidence - and we suggest you begin with articles on this website. We're reluctant to present even the broad outlines of a case BEFORE you've had a chance to examine this material.
http://physics911.org/net/modules/news/

"For those who prefer to progress from a broader context to specifics, this Brief Overview of 9/11 Theories may help situate Physics911.org in the current debate about the events of September 11th 2001.
http://physics911.org/net/modules/news/article.php?storyid=5

You can also do google searches on various topics. For an interesting example, do a search on: Rowley, Bowman, Moussaoui -- then on Moussaoui, Wellstone, Paul Guess.

Good luck.

[Poiuyt]

15. Definately Help

Americans tend to pull together in times of crisis. The public would rally around bush and give him what he wants. Need proof? Just look what happened after 9/11. He was able to get the Patriot Act through without any problems and got a blank check to invade Iraq even though they had nothing to do with 9/11.

If there was another terrorist attack, bush would definately get re-elected.

[DemoTex]

16. Does the Constitution give the P. the power to suspend elections?

Chapter and verse please.

[w4rma]

19. The whackjob will suspend elections, imho.

So in the respect that he gets to be dictator, I guess that would help.