Quote:
Originally posted by Clodfobble
Stay with me here: if Kerry is elected, he will make some quick apologies to the world for what's been going on for the last four years, and begin "cleaning things up."
|
But see, that's a projection on your part. (I mean projecting as in projecting what you want to see on the situation.)
If we want to think about how a hypothetical terrorist attack on the US affects the November election, let's start by dividing the voters into a few camps and analyzing
how the terrorist attack changes their votes.
[list=1][*]
Democratic Loyalists. These people voted for Gore in 2000. They've been determined to vote against Bush ever since. It's hard to imagine what could make them vote FOR Bush, and a terrorist attack certainly won't do it. That would only confirm the belief of these voters that Bush has mishandled our foreign policy.[*]
Republican Loyalists. These people elected Bush in 2000, and they'll do their damndest to elect him again in 2004. While some of them may have doubts about the current situation, they have no doubts that democrats are spineless pansies who lack the fortitude to defend America. A terrorist attack does not put these people in the mood to hand the oval office to Kerry.[*]
Democratic Swing Voters. These people are pretty much democrats, but they can be convinced to vote Republican if they believe democrats who are in power are going in the wrong direction, or that republicans in power are doing a good job. Polling evidence suggests that, at least at the moment, these people don't feel Bush is doing a good job, so their natural tendency to vote Democrat in the absence of mitigating factors will probably hold. A terrorist attack is unlikely to convince people overnight that Bush is doing a good job.[*]
Republican Swing Voters. Just like category 3, these voters are Republicans, but they can cast Democratic ballots under duress. One interesting question is how likely these people might be
at this moment to vote against Bush. Barring a big change in Kerry's perceived positives, I feel these voters are more likely to sit home than actually vote for Kerry. A terrorist attack may scare them into voting for Bush if they buy into the "strong leader" meme, but again, a lot of polls suggest discontent in the ranks and it's not impossible that these folks wouldn't see an attack as the final straw for their increasing discontent.[*]
Undecided Voters. I have to admit, I personally find it hard to believe this particular group really exists in great numbers, in spite of what they may tell the pollsters. But assuming they do exist, I don't think it's a lock which way an attack pushes them in terms of voting.[/list=1]
Feel free to poke holes in my analysis (if you can dignify it by calling it such), but from where I sit a terrorist attack is highly unlickely to change the way anybody will vote.