|
Bush's Trump Card on Iraq and Terrorism
~ #39
By
Alan F. Kay, PhD
© 2004, (fair use with attribution and copy to author)
Aug. 10, 2004 |
|
Any question bearing strongly on
the outcome of the presidential election that produces surprising answers is
worth looking at more closely. Take a look at:
(1). "Do you think the
war with Iraq has made the United States safer – or less safe – from terrorism?"
Gallup asked this identical question seven times from April 2003 to July 2004
with these responses:
| |
safer |
less safe |
no change (vol.) |
DK |
| April 2003 |
58% |
33% |
8% |
1% |
| Oct 2003 |
45 |
43 |
10 |
2 |
| Nov 2003 |
48 |
43 |
7 |
2 |
| Dec 2003 |
56 |
33 |
7 |
3 |
| Mar 2004 |
50 |
37 |
10 |
3 |
| May 2004 |
42 |
51 |
5 |
2 |
| June 2004 |
37 |
55 |
6 |
2 |
Notice that in the nine months
from the start of the war through to the close of 2003, percentages feeling
safer and thereby supporting the Iraq war bounced around 52%, and marginally
amounted to the majority of Americans. Then, beginning last December, the
percent feeling safer shrank rapidly in six months to reach a low of 37% at the
last asking, just seven weeks ago (June 21-23).
Since the principal issue of the
presidential campaign, "Who will best handle terrorism and the Iraq war?" is the
only issue on which President George W. Bush is clearly leading Democratic
challenger John Kerry, it seems reasonable that tracking this one issue week by
week might provide the leading indicator for who'll win the election. If the
drop continued to election day at the same rate as the first half of the year,
Kerry would seem to be a shoe-in. But there is a flaw in this reasoning.
Q1 has been asked in two
other ways that can explain what is going on:
(Q2) (CBS News/NY Times)
"Have the policies of the Bush administration made the United States safer
from terrorism, less safe from terrorism, or have the policies of the
Bush administration not affected the U.S. safety from terrorism?"
| |
Safer |
Less safe |
No effect |
DK |
| June 23-27/04 |
53% |
28% |
15% |
4% |
| May 20-23/04 |
50 |
26 |
19 |
5 |
Since Bush has managed the whole
Iraq war from start to finish in an aggressive, take-charge manner, it seems
reasonable that Bush would get the heat from a steadily growing number of people
(already by June reaching 15% of the total population) switching from feeling
"safer" to "less safe". But Bush is
not losing public support to
Kerry on the issue of making the United States safe, as the next question shows:
(Q3) (ABC News/Washington
Post) "Who will make the country safer and more secure, Bush or Kerry?"
| |
|
|
Both |
Neither |
|
| |
Bush |
Kerry |
(vol.) |
(vol.) |
DK |
| June 17-20/04 |
54% |
40% |
1% |
3% |
2% |
| July 22-25/04 |
54 |
38 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
Making the country safer from
terrorism is one of the few issues on which Bush leads Kerry significantly and
that has not been changing. The 15% who have already shifted from "safer" to
"less safe" have not shifted to Kerry.
We can clear up this anomaly by
noting that there is only one significant difference between the wording of Q1
and of Q2 — the threat itself. In Q1 the threat is the "Iraq war"
and in Q2 it is "Bush's policies." The discrepancy must be that
significant numbers of people believed that Bush's policies started shifting in
a way that retained his public support, and indeed the historical facts clearly
seem to make that case.
During 2003, Bush focused on
pursing an all-out military campaign. His mission was accomplished in a record
19 days, characterized as a slam dunk, and at costs well below the expectations
of naysayers. The success lingered for months, even as the U.S. forces were not
well prepared to govern the Iraqi people, nor to provide for their security, nor
restore basic utility functions. Looting and insurgency started to take its
toll. Beginning in 2004, Bush began to adopt a different policy – announcing the
stepwise introduction of an interim Iraqi government with a democratic election
by January of 2005, refusing to introduce more U.S. troops into Iraq but instead
contracting out military functions to commercial corporations, announcing in
June a push for quickly installing a caretaker Iraqi government, and a
commitment to withdraw U.S. forces completely as soon as the new prime minister,
Iyad Allawi, wanted them to leave. Although it is uncertain whether Bush would
follow through on these policies that were largely intended to be implemented at
some later time, the public apparently accepted them as a reasonable and
beneficial change in policy.
Since Bush has top pollsters
working for him, it is not surprising that he would at least pay lip service to
the policies that polling shows the people want. Never mind that Bush has made
clear that we might have to be in Iraq for many years. About half of the
people, those who are pro-Bush, accept that. The shift in policies was
significant to 15% of the population, people who were not drawn to Kerry and
were satisfied with Bush's policy changes. This analysis shows that support for
Bush will not drop significantly just because increasing numbers of people agree
that the war has made the United States less safe. Similarly, the number of
people who believe the "war was not worth it" has not increased in recent
months. Other developments, perhaps the economy and other domestic and
environmental issues, will affect the election outcome, still almost a
dead-heat, more than Iraq and terrorism.
o - o - o - o - o - o - o - o
Alan F. Kay is a mathematician, social scientist and pioneer of public-interest polling. He has authored
Locating Consensus for Democracy and numerous public policy articles and holds several patents. (see
www.publicinterestpolling.com)
|