If there is a major terrorist attack, who benefits? Bush or Kerry?

[ringmastery]

Let's say the news out today is accurate.

Sometime this summer there will be a major biological, chemical or radiological attack in the US, and thousands will die.

Will Americans rally around Bush again or gravitate to Kerry more?

[RummyTheDummy]

1. Unfortunately they'd rally behind Shit For Brains

At least that's how I think it would go down. We don't think rationally here like they do in Europe, we embrace what we know in uncertain times.

[Syrinx]

2. its gonna be democratic convention

mark it down

[Ganja Ninja]

29. A little American made Anthrax in the A/C system and presto ...

Bush runs unopposed.

[ibegurpard]

3. Don't know about anyone else

but I rallied around Bush after 9/11 and will most definitely NOT be making that mistake again.

[shraby]

4. Where are the biggest concentrations of

Democrats? Look for the hit there, our numbers have to be depleted you know.

[rpannier]

5. Don't know...

don't care. Sorry bout that, but if thousands are dead, I have little concern for who it benefits. There are too many variables to decide who benefits, anyway.

[Zorra]

6. Obviously, this would make Shrubnut an even greater failure at protecting

American lives than he already has proven to be.

How could he benefit? He'll be extremely lucky if the American people don't call for a televised public hanging.

[shraby]

7. Since he has

underfunded so many homeland security projects like police, fire depts, trains, nuclear plants, etc. ad infinitum, I think he'll get booted.

[Lucky Luciano]

8. My feelings Exactly

b*sh keeps touting his strength on terrorism issues....so if an attack were to occur, it would do a great deal to undermine is strength on terrorism. That would be cutting out the very last leg that he currently stands on. All of the public would boot him then, except for the Freepers who would blame the attacks on the Clinton family, including Chelsea who is now old enough to be part of the blame for all that goes wrong in America according to them.

[andino]

10. well, my thoughts are

that a attack will benefit Bush. NO ONE will call him on the next terror attack because it would be political suicide to point fingers after a national tragedy. The best thing that Kerry could do after the attack would be to call for a fast reaction to it and hope that bush doesn't f'it up again.

I think that the thing that Kerry should do is to pound home the point that if we found Bin Laden instead of going into Iraq we might not be in this 'threat' situation. He also needs to point the finger at bush for not going after the "REAL" threat.

If Kerry plays the run up right he could come out looking better.

I would also like to add that I hope this threat is just another threat that goes by without anything happening. We really don't need another 9/11.

[Pachamama]

9. Bush Won't Benefit...He claims we are all safer under him - and clearly...

...if we are attacked again, it will prove we aren't - besides, after the whole Iraq fiasco, his opponents and critics alike can prove that he actually made us a bigger target through his actions and through his massive spending in Iraq yet cuts to key services like Police, Fire Dept's, hospitals etc. across the country...

Hopefully to take it a step further the nation would respond like Spain and say enough is enough....If it happens at the Democratic Convention, I say don't look for Zarqawi or OBL but the Bushies....(or some crazy Freeper)....

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

11. Not to be rude,

but no one benefits. Call me what ye will, but I have a real problem looking for some sort of political benefit in a terrorist attack that kills innocent Americans.

[Bridget Burke]

15. But what if somebody IS looking for political benefit?

What if they didn't do all they could to prevent 9/11? What if they decide to "let" something happen this summer--because they think it will make their boy look good?

That's what nobody has said on this thread--yet.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

18. Well there's a great point,

and I think that's something to think about...

[progdonkey]

12. depends on approval rating

I've been very concerned over the outcome of a possible terrorist attack this year. Will the country rally around Bush again? or will it call for his head? I think it all depends on his credibility at the time of the attack.

September 11th was seen by most to be a complete shock (who knew that a guy named Osama bin Laden wanted to attack the US? even Condi Rice didn't know...). Because of this, Americans rallied around the leader, believing that he had done (or would have done if intelligence existed) everything possible to protect Americans.

Now that we've had three years to catch bin Laden, fund First Responders, fund better counter-terrorism, etc., I think the American people will be less kind to Bush if another attack occurs; especially among those who accept that the Iraq war is nothing but a detour from the War on Terror. ("You had three years to go after al-Qaeda, but instead you invaded the country of al-Qaeda's enemy!")

That's not to say they'd call for his removal, though. If Bush has high approval ratings at the time of an attack, it's more likely Americans will be forgiving of him ("he did all he could"). Unfortunately for Bush, his ratings are in the gutter, and they have no hint of rising.

I predict that if another attack occurs, his base will became ten times more violent and hate-filled towards dissenters, but this will be counter-balanced by the left becoming ten times more adamant in his removal and a significant increase in Bush disapproval among moderates.

There is also the extra variable of the location of the attack and the death-toll, but I think what I said above would apply in most possible attacks.

[Senior citizen]

13. Cheney

Basically, every time there is a terrorist or pseudo-terrorist attack, the military-industrial complex benefits.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

26. Bunker boy is a guaranteed survivor in any event

so that is doubly true.

[Jim Warren]

14. Reason says bushco

After spending billions on homeland security and the Iraq massacre he should be seen as squandering any credibility at protecting the country.

HOWEVER, reason has little chance of prevailing in the aftermath of a big event. Look for the little flags on suction cups and glazed looks on peoples faces to tell the tale.

[AndyTiedye]

16. It Would Benefit Bush*

by giving him an excuse to declare martial law and cancel the election.

[KayLaw]

25. I agree

I was going to post exactly the same thing.

[NewJeffCT]

32. I agree

Not only that, the "Liberal" media will all declare that we have to stand united behind our war president in this troubling time. Faux will beat this drum over and over and the rest will follow Rove's lead and declare that nobody could have stopped it - but that Bush would have moved "heaven & earth" if Osama had sent him an engraved invitation to the terror attacks...

[Dont Hurt Me]

17. it would benefit bush

but if we are attacked i hate to see it as someone benefiting.

Funny thing is why would they attack us. One of the main reasons they did before was due to u.s. influence and presence in the middle east. well we see how that worked out for them. Any more attacks would rally many moderates to bush and bring more people to support current and future military action.

[radfringe]

19. let's re-cap recent "events"

--- NO WMD's found in Iraq
--- Cheney has to hold bush*'s hand during 9-11 investigation
--- April was bloodiest month in Iraq
--- Abu Ghraib torture hit the headlines
--- Berg was beheaded
--- Gas prices soared
--- Chalabi's offices raided
--- US intelligence "duped" by Chalabi
--- Chalabi gave info it Iran
--- public perception: no plan for Iraq
--- bush*'s peace plan for Iraq at WAR college a bust
--- bush*'s numbers in the toilet
--- job market still sucks


I had expected a big "boost" for bush* after Berg was beheaded, with headlines calling for retaliation... but quite the contrary -- depending on the poll, bush*'s numbers either remained the same or took a hit

that a "terra-lert" has been issued is not surprising -- bush is in big trouble and his speech flew about as well as a lead balloon

14 months AFTER invading, and 1 month before June 30th "deadline" -- bush* comes out with a "plan"??? Makes him look pretty incompetent and the poll numbers show that many people are questioning his leadership ability.

Meanwhile -- many cities/towns have laid-off fire/police and other emergency/first-responders due to lack of funding. Many places don't have equipment to deal with a "terrattack" due to lack of funding. We are probably LESS prepared to deal with a "terrattack" now than we were prior to September 11.

We've also had 3 years of "terra-lerts", booga-boogas, orange alerts, and the bush* choir singing "Wolf Wolf Wolf"

Initially, I think there will be a rally round the pResident should a "terrattack" occur -- for a couple of days. Then people are going to start asking WHERE'S HOMELAND SECURITY? Why don't cities/towns have the personnel/equipment? Where's the beef? WHERE'S BIN-LADEN? Why did we invade Iraq, when Bin-Laden is still out there in Afghanistan?

If these questions are asked, and all we get is "...they hate freedom.." for answers --- bush* will definitely be toast in November.

[jeff30997]

20. A little theory :

There's a horrible terrorist attack(why not a "dirty" bomb?).
A week or so after that,the evil Bin Ladin is miraculously captured(most certainly dead).Glory alleluia !!! Let's all rally around Chimpy,our savior!(And a drum or two of chemical agents "found" in the Iraqi desert wouldn't hurt to justify this fiasco either)This is about the worst case scenario i can imagine.I sure hope this is just that,a scenario,a little theory.

[izzie]

21. Well they have hit business and the military so govt. this time?

I think the 4th plane was after the Capital and they will go for something like that. WH is two small.

[Eurobabe]

22. nobody

this world is f*cked up. n/t

[MarioJumps]

23. Bush

There are either two possible outcomes:

1. People support Bush a hell of a lot more. These people will be very afraid (and it is well established that people act irrationally and with out thought when very afraid) and will be looking for the first person to say they will protect them whether it is true or not. Bush will be the one first to do this, and the media will make sure the message gets out. Further, historically it is very rare for a nations populace not to support their leader after a major tragedy.

2. People who support Bush now stop doing so and support Kerry. (or stay home in November) Unofortunately for this to be what happens people MUST be VERY well read in political events, Bush, Kerry, and depend on something other than FAUX, CNN, et al for their thoughts and information.

Now anyone who is not in complete denial is fully aware MOST americans don't know a damn thing about world events, politics, or those who hold elected office. I have even read some polls that indicate most americans don't know who the secretary of state/defense is, can't name a single supreme court justice, and that a signifigant number of people think watching 5 minutes of TV news a day makes them "informed".

An ignorant populace will NEVER make the right choice, and they will generally go with whoever the right wing leader may be. If he wants more blood than the person on the left (as bush will) then that's who they will support.

I believe that if something major happened (i.e. a major city gets vaporized) the right wingers will probably see to it that ANYONE even SLIGHTLY criticizing bush will be shot on the spot for treason. (as martial law will proably be declared) This will be especially true in the red states. There will be no way Bush will not benefit.

[newyawker99]

31. Hi MarioJumps!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[dusty64]

24. It won't benefit chimp

if we start explaining how his agenda has made us a hundred times LESS safe. Isn't it kinda ironic he is strutting around the Country crowing about how much he has done to protect us while EVERYTIME the shit is about to hit their fan ANOTHER vague terra alert is issued, or am I the ONLY one who sees this? Its time for the Democrats to rip the wizards curtain back and expose them for what they are. If they don't I'm POSITIVE they are gonna pull some serious shit just in time for the elections.

[LWolf]

27. We all lose.

Nobody gains from a terror attack.

I'm not a particularly fearful person; I'll hope that we don't generate all kinds of fearful, or angry, energy just contemplating the possibility of an attack. That energy could generate support for Kerry as well as Bush, since Bush has so obviously failed in the job of "keeping us safe." But I don't want my country to go further down the road we've been on since 9-11.

Whether or not the news is accurate, it generates momentum for fear and anger when we give it power. I don't see how that momentum benefits us, so I'll choose to focus on generating optimism and hope for the Kerry campaign this summer.

[GreenPartyVoter]

28. It'll be an even split of swing voters

Some won't be thinking and will hide behind $hrub cause he made them feel better on 9/11. Others will run for Kerry because it would be the last straw to break their mild support of $hrub.

[Hubert Flottz]

30. Bush is saying he can protect America better than Kerry!

Well he didn't protect us on 9/11! He was back in grade school that day! AWOL again!