Longest War can last for Bush to keep job

[Easy Mac]

Whats the longest the war can last, and Bush still keep his job? This is assuming the Dems run out at least a decent candidate... so they'd better go find a cute dog or koala or something.

I think with a decent candidate, it can't last more that 8 months. A very good candidate (doubtful), and I'd say 6 tops.

Of course, when it started, I figured 2 months and we'd be outta there (just b/c I don't agree with the war doesn't mean I haven't thought about it).

[Ben E Lou]

Well...this is a tough one. I think length of the war will be an important factor, but also how the war is going. If the going is very slow because it turns out he's using chemical weapons out the wazoo, faking surrenders and killing soldiers, etc. etc. etc., the righteous anger of Americans will turn against Saddam, and Bush could win a landslide. If the going is very slow because it appears we had a poor battle plan, he loses big.

[Bee]

While I agree with Skydog that it's also very important how the war is going, I think if it lasts more than 6 months the answer to that question will almost certainly be poorly. There should be nothing that Iraq can do that would stretch this war beyond 6 months. I'd be surprised if it lasts more than 6 weeks. Of course, it also depends on how you define "the war". After Saddam is removed, I expect many Iraqis will attack us in "terrorist attacks" and/or guerrilla warfare attacks. So at that point it's a different kind of war and that one could last years.

[Aylmar]

Hmm...tough to vote on this one. Not only do the Dems need a strong canditate to emerge (which at this point, they don't have, IMO), they also have to bank on the economy staying in the dumps for the next fourteen to eighteen months. If the economy begins picking up, then I think Bush will be tough to beat.

I agree with SkyDog...it's not the actual length of the war...it's the perception of the war that will be important to the President.

As for Bee's concerns, I think that they are totally valid. There could be anti-American actions in Iraq for years to come. Once the regime is toppled and the majority of our forces ship out, though, I think that most of the public will consider the "war" to be over. Any further attacks on American positions will most likely be viewed as isolated incidents by the media (and, by extension, the general public).

[andy m]

it's a moot point, because he'll fix the election and win anyway.

[Craptacular]

Gimme a frickin' break.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally posted by Easy Mac
Whats the longest the war can last,

Umm ... just so I can take a stab at this one, what are you using as "the end of the war"?

Reverts to mop-up operations?
Last shot fired with bad intent?
80%-90% of U.S. troops out of Iraq?
100% of U.S. military troops out of Iraq?

I'm not trying to give you a hard time EM, there's just a pretty big difference in my answers to the various possible definitions.

[CamEdwards]

I happen to think as long as we're able to hear from the Iraqi people before the election, this war won't dissuade too many Republicans from voting for Bush. Quite honestly, I think it will be the world reaction to this war that will make people vote for a Democrat. We (in general) don't like to be seen as a bully, and if that's what the world thinks of us it might be enough to sway the vote Democratic. It all depends on if the Democrats can get someone of substance to run.

I say we nominate Andy for the job. Oh wait, he's British.

Nevermind.

[Dutch]

Okay so Bush should be motivated (if this poll is any indication) to have as quick a war as possible but should also have an improving economy....the Democrats are hoping for an extended war and sinking economy?

And people wonder why I don't trust or like those Dems. :)

[JonInMiddleGA]

the Democrats are hoping for an extended war and sinking economy?

I heard Tony Snow talking about this very situation over the weekend (Friday night I think), that's pretty much the corner they've managed to paint themselves into, with the additional element of (politically) needing additional terrorist attacks related to the Iraqi campaign to occur in the U.S.

Note: I'm not accusing any or all Dems of wanting attacks to happen, I'm just pointing out that it'd be better for them politically in some ways.