StudioGlyphic

"I'm a war president."
--George Bush on Meet the Press, February 7, 2004

In an appearance cited widely as an attempt to stop declining poll numbers against the verbal onslaught of the Democratic primaries (the second such attempt, after the coolly-received State of the Union address), President Bush stated the central theme of his campaign: war.

According to conventional wisdom, this was a smart move for Bush-Cheney Re-Elect 2004. With the administration using every opportunity to hammer home the message that Americans had plenty to fear, and the predictable boost the Commander In Chief receives from an ongoing war, campaigning on a war that the White House had gone to great lengths to associate with terrorism was a no-brainer.

Except the people executing that war had shit for brains. The neo-conservatives at the Pentagon based their post-war plans on the fantastic stories told by Ahmad Chalabi and predictably botched the whole thing. Let's not mince words. The situation in Iraq is bad, and the outlook is bleak.

Several recent polls show the fallout from this neo-conservative crusade to safeguard the Holy Land:

CNN/Time: (MOE +/- 3.1%)

Kerry: 51
Bush: 46

Bush Approve/Disapprove: 46/49

CNN/USA Today/Gallup (MOE +/- 3%)

Bush: 48
Kerry: 47

Bush Approve: 46

AP-Ipsos (MOE +/- 3%)

Kerry: 43
Bush: 46

Quinnipiac (MOE +/- 2.2%)

Kerry: 40
Bush: 43

Bush Approve/Disapprove: 46/47

Live by the gun, die by the gun.

Yet if we were to be completely honest about the significance of the success/failure of the Iraq war and its impact on the campaign, we'd have to admit that almost none of the bad news coming out of Iraq has had much of an effect on Bush's ratings. It was only when these prison abuse photos surfaced on national television that whatever reservations the public may have had about the war crystallized into poor poll numbers. This says a lot about the impact of images. It says even more about the waking dream in which we live our lives.

Some notes about the polls:
1) CNN/Time shows Kerry with a significant lead over Bush. Quinnipiac shows Bush with a slight lead over Kerry. The other two are statistical ties. However, the Qunnipiac poll was not as recent as the CNN/Time poll. At this point in the election campaign, no incumbent has been this close in poll numbers to the challenger and gone on to win. Undecideds apparently break for the challenger at the last minute, reducing the poll leads of incumbents.
2) All four polls show overall approval ratings well below 50%--a bad sign for BCRC04.
3) Polls are relatively useless, but they are useful in highlighting trends--and most of the polls have been showing a gradual downward trend for Bush.
4) It's still a damn close race. Every vote (per precinct) really does count. 2000 margins in several key states often came down to under ten votes per precinct. If you, your family, friends, neighbors, and relatives do not vote on Election Day, you may allow your precinct to go to Bush.

A note about terminology:
In this post, we've used terms such as "President" and "Re-Elect." We, of course, mean no such thing, and only use these terms to ensure the flow of ideas is uninterrupted. Exacting readers may mentally substitute "Resident," "Appointee," or "Occupant" for "President" and "Elect" for "Re-Elect." Thank you for understanding.