Polls Suggest War Isn't Hurting Bush

[Jon8503]

By John F. Harris and Thomas E. Ricks, Washington Post Staff Writers

This spring, when mounting casualties and a prison scandal were causing public support for President Bush (news - web sites)'s Iraq (news - web sites) policies to plunge, his campaign strategists were confidently predicting that Iraq problems would present no major threat to his reelection once U.S. forces turned over authority to an interim government in Baghdad.

In the months since, the evidence so far has proven that prediction more right than wrong.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&ncid=1802&e=1&u=/washpost/20040910/ts_washpost/a9968_2004sep9

[deutsey]

1. It may not be hurting Bush, but it's killing thousands of others

:puke:

[LynnTheDem]

2. That's just

SHAME on Americans.

[Owlet]

3. Why should the war hurt Bush?

All most folks see of it is a sanitized version on TV, where US tanks rumble confidently through Baghdad streets, squashing the occasional market kiosk and Iraqi insurgent. Showing returning caskets is a no-no. Reporters and cameramen aren't allowed anywhere near any actual fighting in case the image of a wounded US serviceman might acidentally be captured. People aren't going to blame anyone for a conflict that has been packaged as a response to the 911 attack. I don't think the handing over of 'soverignty' had any impact on the average viewer. The war has receded into the background, sort of a dull unpleasantness but nothing to get overly worked up about. Hurricane Ivan is a lot more more exciting than another day of bombing in Faluja.

[Jon8503]

4. Personally I think it is just another dam Media idea put out there

because the media has always seemed to like it for the same reason Halliburton likes it. The Bush supporters don't seem to give a dam what he does, they are going to support him.

The only hope is the independents or intelligent voter who has yet to decide.