LAT: After Flagging Support, a Second Wind for Bush (from London bombings)

After Flagging Support, a Second Wind for Bush
By Doyle McManus, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — The bombs exploded in London, but the repercussions are still rippling across Washington.

A surge in public concern about terrorism means a probable boost in support for President Bush and the war in Iraq.

Renewed fear of terrorist sleeper cells will probably spur increased support for tough law enforcement measures such as the Patriot Act, which is up for renewal. And there's new enthusiasm in Congress for increased spending on domestic security, especially mass transit — an area in which legislators were cutting budgets three weeks ago.

There's no telling how long the wave of concern will last. If the London attack gives way to months of calm, the increased fear — and any gain in popularity for Bush — may well be short-lived. But for the moment, Washington is back in 9/11 mode.

"The bombings will give both Bush and Blair a boost," said Christopher Gelpi, a political scientist at Duke University who studies public opinion in times of war. "I think the attacks may help slow the ebbing of support over Iraq, because the bombings make point about linking Iraq and terrorism."...


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-assess10jul10,0,3926775.story?coll=la-home-headlines

If we DON'T get hit by terrorists, the media tells us to credit * for his brilliant war on terra.

Now when we DO get hit by terrorists, the media tells us we will rally round our glorious leader and support his (clearly ineffective) war on terra.

I give up.

so far this is just the LATimes speculating--sticking its finger up its butt to see which way the wind is blowing.

Wait for actual poll numbers showing Bush benefitting once more from his administration's dismal failures, before allowing yourself to feel that tidal wave of disgust. Wait...a little longer... Wait for it...
I like the feeling of suspense.

MUST NOT MAKE ANY FART JOKES. MUST NOT. (grits teeth).

What this means is all the political suit-droids are running for cover until they see which way the wind blows.

Or perhaps McManus is just taking dictation from Karl again? After Karl has lied so many times to journalists, they surely are not still printing his pap, so I'm thinking you are right, and they simply don't know which side the great 'Murcan population is going to take in this situation; therefore the wise journalists are hedging their bets on this one. One thing these last 5 years has taught me is that most of the American journalists really don't know much unless someone leaks it to them. How sad is that? (to borrow a tired old question).

Trying to hedge on the credibility they imagine they still have.
We haven't had any real journalists in the mainstream press in a long time, essentially since the newspapers all got agglomerated into a homogenous gruel dispenser.

And if it does, it won't last long. People are getting sick of Junior's act; even the ones that support him. He's getting more and more like that embarrasing relation you "forget" to invite to a holiday dinner. You know the one, who is always full of himself about his next "business venture" one time, and who the next time is looking to borrow money. We're on to him now.

for Bush/Blair, Galloway didn't waste any time linking the current incidents to Britain's involvement in iraq.

Our people realize that rallying around * will only embolden him to do more crazy things and in the process endanger more americans at home and soldiers in the field.

DU thread on Galloway's remarks


Londoners have paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan, says George Galloway

Galloway: Bombings price of Iraq

"A surge in public concern about terrorism means a probable boost in support for President Bush and the war in Iraq."
really says they are hedging their bets. The media didn't use to claim "a probable" boost.

it is the worst player in this game -

"the people are calmly awaiting the outcome of the stolen 2000 election" :puke:

"the people rally around the war" :puke:

"the people are too stupid to understand their fearless leader" :puke:

Hey, LAT - STFU!

when something like the London bombings occur, "WHO does it benefit?"

and you will thereby gain some inkling as to why it occurred.

Cui bono.

BTW, the London bombing makes clear why Karl Rove gave that speech about liberals wanting to offer therapy to terrorists.

He knew it was coming and he wanted to pre characterize the response.

It also explains Dubya's cackling response to that Brit interviewer's question about George having doubts during a dark night of the soul.

"Don't worry about my dark night of the soul you poncy English twit. You'll have one of your own to worry about soon enough!"

and I'd like to say that the american people can see through this but I know I'm wrong. They'll be licking the smirking tyrants boots again with no questions at all. See how easy it is? Have a terrorist attack the sheeple fellate the big daddy W. Blair, however, will not be so fortunate. They still have too many thinking people in merry ole' England.

here." The attacks prove him a liar. He gets no bounce from me.

The only silver lining is that the LA Times will continue to hemorrhage subscribers and ad revenues will continue to drop. Believe me, people in LA have noticed the difference since the Trib took over....

Some people I know don't even bother reading the Times anymore... used to be one of the better papers. Now its mostly generic crap like all of the rest.

And some bits in the Sunday LAT.

It's actually more "liberal" than it used to be (IMHO), but also more like USA Today, and the writing has gone downhill.

My wife refuses to cancel the damn thing.

Still hovering around the 50% mark where he has been for about ten days, +/-4

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/Bush_Job_Approval.htm

So, I doubt if he will be getting any bump or any blame for it either.....

the big three 24 hour news networks, MSNBC is blaming the London attacks on * and Iraq. (Still cant figure out why GE is now so gung-ho to get us out of Iraq. Maybe the high price of oil is killing the manufacturing and transporatation sector of the economy). The GOP doesnt dare try to score political points off London because of the DSMs which suggest that Britain was forced into *s "Vanity War".

No bump.

The DSM, recruitment down, Rove, etc., etc. "Gotta instill some new fear in people. France? Naw, everyone would say so what. Let's plant some bombs in London, and if we destory our own people...hey, we gotta fight terrizm ya know, and the few outweigh the many. We'll just blame the brown people. People will believe us, they'll be scared as heck, and the ratings will go up."

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/11/1976/31022

After weeks of flagging poll numbers for Bush -- and a media who ignored them -- we get this mysterious story from the LA Times gleefully cheering "After Flagging Support, a Second Wind for Bush" http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-ass... .

One would think that after no stories about Bush's slog, a story of Bush's "second wind" might include a poll. But the only polls cited were taken /before/ the London attacks -- you know, the one statistic in all that time where Bush's positive numbers were actually a few percentage points bigger than his negatives: Bush's handling of the War on Terror. Based on that statistic alone, and numerous quotes from pollsters who have no poll to give us to back up their claims, Bush is "surging" because of his strength on Terror.

I wonder: If there is a "bounce" as they're predicting, will it indeed be due to Bush's reputation as a strong leader? Or the media's framing of the situation that way before they have any qualitative evidence to back them up?


/The media is not your friend. It is your enemy.

he had nothing new to say and the 9/11 meme was wearing thin (even the subliminal 9/11 flags didn't seem to help).

Lucky for him that 7/7 came along to take the spotlight away from the G8 and back on to his "strong point" of terrorism...

Seeing as today, Bush is at his lowest approval ratings ever.

conservative assholes are always using the sickening talking point WE ARE FIGHTING TERRORISM IN IRAQ SO WE WON'T HAVE TO FIGHT IT HERE. Besides the fact that I'm sure the Iraqi chilren appreciate THAT, I doubt suicide bombings in ENGLAND fit that ridiculous theory.