[Keith]

These guys are amongst the best...Good analysis. Everyone take a chill pill and have a nice Memorial Day vacation.

[DM1]

well lets hope that this is correct and BUsh and the Rs can turn things around
I just read that not only may we lose the Senate but the House as well! I definitlely thought that we had the House no matter what :(

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Yes, I know all about the falling job approval numbers, the right/track wrong/track polls, and about how no modern day President has won reelection with approval ratings below 50%.

Yeah. Crazy, wacky me for finding this sort of thing even the teensiest bit troubling, obviously. < /sarcasm>

[southernnorthcarolina]

"Real Clear Politics" had a real foggy crystal ball in 2000. They were way off; if I recall correctly, they were predicting a landslide win by Bush through most of the campaign, and still had him up by 5% or more on election eve.

That said, I agree with their current analysis. Maybe both the RCP folks and I are incurable optimists.

[Charlotte Corday]

In World War II, we put the whole country on an economic footing for war. Although it was Churchill who promised "blood, toil, tears and sweat", much the same thing was done in the US.

In Vietnam, by contrast, LBJ tried to win a war while telling the home front, "life is good, keep up the boom times, it's business as usual".

In this important respect, the war on Islamic fascism is more like Vietnam.

[NYC Republican]

Excellent analysis, as usual, by the folks at RCP.

[no_problema]

i'm a positive thinker.

i expect that democrat anti-war stupidity will increase, but after june 30th, and the turnover of the government to iraq, president bush's lot will improve. also, the economy's on the mend.

if president bush does lose the election, instrumental will be the sickos with their photos at abu graib. i hope all involved get the maximum sentence. this issue of all the things brought up by the dems this year got the most traction.

[Common Tator]

And as long as America sees Iraq more like WWII and less like Vietnam, they won't want a President who just wants to get us out, they'll want a President who is willing to do what is necessary to win

One thing is certain. VietNam was very much like VietNam. In 1972 after 8 years of war where 58 thousand American troops (mostly draftees) died, Richard Nixon won the biggest re-election victory of the 20th century.

If Iraq does for Bush what VietNam did for Richard Nixon, Bush wins 61 percent to 37.5 percent.

If Iraq does for Bush what WWII did for Franklin Roosevelt in 1944 then Bush wins 53 to 46.

Nixon did a lot better with Viet Nam as the issue in 72 than FDR did with WWII in 1944.

Oh just for the record in the summer 1944 we had just done little except take some worthless sand in Africa, and a couple of islands in the South Pacific. We were in danger of losing the war in Europe and Asia. It did not look all that good.

We had done little in the Asian theater except take a few islands. We had not bombed Japan and we were in real trouble in China. WE were losing bombers at a fantastic rate in Europe. Victory was anything but certain.

Today's media would have thought that after the first 3, long, non productive, WWII, years all was lost. But we were a little over a year and a three quarters from total victory.

Our major media is our worst enemy and none of us should ever forget it.

Did you know that reporters were drafted into the military in WWII. Everything they wrote or said on the air had to be approved by military censors before it could be aired. Failure of the war reporters to get approval before filing a story, could be punished by death by firing squad.

All battlefield reporters were drafted and given a rank equal to a 2nd john... but with no command authority. They were all subject to military law.

I often wonder if Tom Brokaw would like to report the war news under the rules adopted by the GREATEST GENERATION.

[atomicpossum]

You know, it's rainy here today. Does that mean it will be rainy on election day, too?

There is a lifetime until election time. 51% of the electorate apparently haven't got the news that the economy has been doing great for months now. Gas prices could continue to soar, though the news earlier was saying that they exect a drop around Memorial Day. June 30th hands over contorl of Iraq to the Interim Government. Basically, there are numerous things that could change wholesale in a day, much less five months. They could hurt Bush, they could help him. To begin to despair or celebrate now about any of them is premature.

[CWOJackson]

I particularly like the part where they say:

"Everyone needs to settle down. Republicans should take a deep breath and perhaps take an early Memorial Day vacation and Democrats who are rubbing their hands thinking they are headed for the White House might want to temper their enthusiasm. President Bush is not nearly in as bad of shape as you would think from reading the papers or listening to the punditry on TV. "

I think a lot of people missed that part.

[atomicpossum]

And, for a contrary opinion:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1141208/posts

[AlbionGirl]

There's no question that it's still President Bush's to lose. In fact, if I were in his shoes I'd 'arrange' for Kerry to get more exposure because Kerry begins to do somewhat better, and I emphasize the somewhat, when he remains out of the picture. As soon as he's front and center President Bush's numbers go up. It's really amazing that the President's numbers aren't lower considering the onslaught of negative press he's been getting these last few months. I think he'll win relection. The only thing I think he has to worry about is McCain getting on Kerry's ticket.