October 8, 2004

WHICH MAKES ASHCROFT-BASHING INEXPLICABLE:

Two-thirds of Nation Believes Terror Attack Likely: According to the latest Harris Poll, two-thirds of those polled believe that another terrorist attack in America is likely. (Armando Duke, 10/02/04, AXcess News)

According to the latest Harris Poll, two-thirds of those polled believe that another terrorist attack in America is likely. [...]

* By 67 to 28 percent, a majority of adults feel that it is very (17%) or somewhat (50%) likely that there will be a major terrorist attack in next twelve months.

* The Bush administration receives a 62 to 37 percent positive rating on the job it has done in preventing a new terrorist attack. This is down from February when a 70 to 30 percent majority felt this way.

* Only 17 percent of U.S. adults feel that the government's anti- terrorist program has taken quite a lot or a great deal of their own personal privacy away up slightly from 14 percent in February. Another 21 percent feel they've lost a moderate amount of privacy, similar to how they felt in February (22%).

* Overall, a 77 percent majority feels confident that U.S. law enforcement agencies will use their expanded surveillance powers in a proper way. This is virtually unchanged from February though lower than the September 2001 results (87%).


Numbers like these, the absence of any follow-up attack to 9-11, the election tomorrow in Afghanistan, the smooth handover of sovereignty in Iraq with elections just a few months away, and Senator Kerry's atrocious record on national security are why it seemed unlikely that this election would be fought out on the issue of the war on terror, but somehow the Senator put himself in the position where it is the central point of contention.

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 8, 2004 4:14 PM
Comments

It doesn't help that Bush was unable to counter the Senator's diabolically clever distortions in the first debate. The debate tonight and the third one are on hostile territory for Bush.

Posted by: Peter at October 8, 2004 5:09 PM

Orrin:

I heard that John Ashcroft is likely to leave his position if the President wins reelection. Do you think he should, and why must cabinet members from the first administration often be replaced in the second?

Posted by: Vince at October 8, 2004 5:18 PM

Vince:

Burnout.

Posted by: Fred Jacobsen (San Fran) at October 8, 2004 5:34 PM

Vince:

They'd likely prefer to give it to someone who's less of a lightning rod and you can give Ashcroft a big judgeship (especially if you get close to 60 Senate seats). You'd think Ashcroft would also at least test the presidential waters.


Posted by: oj at October 8, 2004 7:06 PM

John Ashcroft is too far right to win the Presidency; at least, that is how he is perceived.
That would be great if John Aschcroft were appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Talk-show hosts Bernie Ward and Ray Taliafero would literally crap their pants!

Posted by: Vince at October 8, 2004 8:15 PM
« -ER?: | Main | THE 1% SHOULD HAVE TOLD THEM SOMETHING: »