Bush bets on Iraq
Dasu Krishnamoorty
On Wednesday, President Bush thrust Iraq to the centre stage of the election scene much to the dismay of many Republicans who were hoping it would slip out of public consciousness by November 7. His press conference that day reflected the sensitivity of his administration to the damage Iraq can do to GOP’s fortunes in the midterm election. They are dwindling by all media accounts. Nearly every public poll favoured the return of the Democrats. On Wednesday, it was a different Bush talking to newsmen and he spoke a different language. He stopped short of admitting that Iraq was a major mistake. The New York Times agreed that it was a sobering assessment of the war in Iraq today. However, with just ten days to go for the election, the Times came out with a startling story of how billions of dollars meant for rebuilding Iraq went into corporate coffers. This, it followed by an editorial declaring that the chief culprit was Bush administration incompetence and not corporate greed.
Every columnist maintained that Bush had admitted the need for a course correction in Iraq. Across the Atlantic, Guardian thought that the Bush message was all about adaptability in an election season in which "that display of resoluteness had become a liability and a week in which the White House formally disavowed the Iraq war slogan, "stay the course." Bush had repeatedly said that the U.S. will stay the course in the war-torn nation and claimed that stay the course was not an inflexible strategy, but rather, an adaptive one. The Christian Science Monitor had a different take on Iraq. It said, "Both parties already know the public is increasingly disgruntled at the way the Bush administration and the GOP Congress have mismanaged Iraq after the 2003 invasion, making it an issue in the 2006 midterm elections. But many voters may be equally concerned with the way both parties use the war to score political points in campaigns rather than search out a bipartisan approach to ending the US role in Iraq."
The Washington Post complained that Bush had left unclear how the benchmarks (a word he used 13 times) would be different from previous times when the United States had set out intentions, only to back down. "For example, the original war plan envisioned the U.S. troop presence in Iraq being cut to 30,000 by the fall of 2003. Last year, some top U.S. commanders thought they would be able to significantly cut the U.S. troop level in Iraq this year -- a hope now officially abandoned," the Post said. Many Republicans are afraid that the Bush press conference may convey the message that he regards the election as referendum on his Iraq policy.
Thus the Iraq war continues to overshadow economy as an election issue much to the delight of the Democrats. They have tried unsuccessfully to point a finger at economy, but both the Times and its rival the Wall Street Journal agreed that economy as an election issue has lost its shine. This time, it is not the economy, said Eduardo Porter writing for the Times. A Journal columnist wrote, "You don’t have to be a political pundit to know that next month’s elections aren’t about economy. They’re about Iraq." It is now clear that no party can expect traction from economy. So, it goes off the campaign ads. Yet a majority of voters who responded to last week’s Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll said they disapproved of Bush’s handling of the economy.
On November 7, voters will elect a new House of Representatives, renew a third of the Senate membership and choose new governors for 36 states. Though nearly every poll taken so far showed the Democrats in the lead for both chambers, media are reluctant to make any assertion, seeing that the margin of gain or loss for either of the contenders would be minimal. On major issues that will determine the result, public opinion is divided on predictable lines. Republican supporter Barron’s weekly bets on GOP to retain control of Congress. For the Democrats, the liberal media are upbeat. Both parties are pouring in a lot of dollars into the campaign, the upper hand being with the Republicans. Advocacy groups for both sides are taking care of ad expenditure.
To win control of Congress, Democrats must win 16 seats in the House and six in the Senate. Democratic hopes are built around developments on the Iraq war front where the number of Iraqis and Americans killed does not show signs of abating or at least staying constant. Today issues like national security, economy, gas prices, scandals etc. hover on the sidelines. According to a New York Times/CBS News poll, Republican handling of the threat of terrorism has lost its appeal with white voters with no college education. Approval of the president’s handling of security problems has slumped from a margin of 22 percentage points in 2004 to seven percentage points last week. Gas prices have come down in time for the Republicans but many Americans believe that the slide was a political maneuver to retain its hold in the election.
The Republican coffers are overflowing with dollars. According to a White House official, the GOP has a $56 million cash advantage over Democrats. The gap, of course, is narrowing as the election day approaches. Democrats raked more money last month than Republicans could raise in that period. For both sides, there are constituencies where funding advantage is minimal. Voter interest also is an important element in any party’s fortunes. Media concede and Democrats too agree that Republicans are difficult to beat in their drive to get the voter out and cite how the turnout in Ohio in the last presidential election helped Bush win.
Next to Iraq, two unquenched controversies are raging around the old unresolved electronic voting machines and a federal law passed by the House requiring voters to produce photo IDs. A judge in Georgia overturned that state`s ID law for being a form of poll tax. This law will come into force only in 2008 if the Senate also approves it. These government-issued cards need proof of citizenship and civil rights groups maintain that this requirement would disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of minority and elderly voters. Already, these laws are subject-matter of litigation in nine states. The New York Times says, "The actual reason for this bill is the political calculus that certain kinds of people — the poor, minorities, disabled people and the elderly — are less likely to have valid IDs. They are less likely to have cars, and therefore to have drivers’ licenses. There are ways for nondrivers to get special ID cards, but the bill’s supporters know that many people will not go to the effort if they don’t need them to drive."
Many experts warn that the real election cliffhanger will be whether voting machines work. More than 80 per cent of voters will use electronic voting machines this time and a third of all precincts (polling centres) are using this technology for the first time according to the Christian Science Monitor. Election officials maintain that these machines are susceptible to sabotage, manipulation and failure. The main focus is on whether people know how to properly use the machines, particularly the large army of volunteers who staff the polls at most precincts. Bloggers have always warned that a hacker could infect touch screens with a virus that alters vote totals.
In the Senate race, there is media consensus that Missouri, Tennessee and Virginia are likely to tilt the balance. The Republicans have abandoned Ohio. The Los Angeles Times thinks that a Senate majority is within the reach of the Democrats but for resistance from rural voters in these constituencies. Due to influx of people from other states, the old Republican loyalties in some parts of the South are taking a knock raising the hopes of the Democrats. Republicans face challenge in Indiana, Connecticut and Florida. Washington, New Jersey, Maryland and Minnesota are difficult states for the Democrats. The Democrats are ahead of the GOP flank even in the race for the House and governors. But whichever party wins or retains one or both chambers will do so by a margin as thin as a coat of paint.
Contact : dasukrishnamoorty@hotmail.com